Kathmandu/Brussels, 10 April 2003: Nepal has an important opportunity to pull
itself out of conflict, but there is still a risk of a return to violence. A ceasefire was reached
between the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and government forces in January 2003 and has, for now,
stopped the bloodshed. However, each side has already accused the other of persistent violations of
the "code of conduct" governing the ceasefire, and no strong, independent verification process is in
place for the code.
The crisis is complicated by the exclusion of the main political parties from
negotiations, which are being conducted directly between the Maoists and representatives hand-picked
by the King. As a result, the palace, the Maoists and the political parties are locked in a three-way
struggle with the possibility that hard-line elements in each camp would be willing to risk
confrontation if they felt their needs were not being met. If there is a return to violence, the only
consensus is that it will be even more devastating than previously – and this conflict has already
claimed 7,000 lives and sent tens of thousands of people fleeing across the border to India.
A new report by the International Crisis Group,
Nepal Backgrounder: Ceasefire - Soft Landing or Strategic Pause?*, argues that the current crisis
represents a failure to cement broader reforms and sounder institutional arrangements after the
democratic uprising of 1990.
ICG Asia Program Director Robert Templer said: "The constitution drafted after the
1990 uprising was flawed and left the monarchy with considerable but undefined powers. The political
parties continue to be dominated by elite, older and often non-responsive leaderships. Abuses by
police and the army further the climate of impunity while the economic situation is dismal. In these
conditions, the Maoist insurgency flourished".
It is tempting for the international community to overlook the increasingly
undemocratic nature of the government in hopes that a strong king is best positioned to secure a
lasting peace. This has been the approach of the United States, which has directed substantial military
aid to the government, rather simplistically viewing the conflict as an extension of the global war
on terrorism.
ICG Special Adviser John Norris points out: "The seeds of Nepal's problems were
planted by a long reluctance to embrace a more open economy and a more inclusive political process.
The confrontation with the Maoists has painfully exposed Nepal's slowness to modernise a society that
is heavily dominated by issues of class, caste, ethnicity and geography. Negotiations between the
palace and Maoists will not resolve Nepal's problems unless they eventually lead to discussions on a
legal and constitutional framework that will serve all citizens".
MEDIA CONTACTS
Katy Cronin (London) +44-(0)20 7981 0330
email: [email protected]
Francesca Lawe-Davies (Brussels) +32 (0)2 536 0065
Jennifer Leonard (Washington) +1 202 785 1601
*Read the full ICG report on our website:
www.crisisweb.org
