From Delhi with warning!

In case if you are wondering why the Maoists allowed the resumption of the parliament, the reason is very clear: To tell the world why their torch rally, mass demonstration and the three days of mayhem across the nation was justifiable. No, it was not the civilian supremacy argument. The better rational was put on a plate and delivered to them from Delhi. Watching for months the inaptness of the Nepali political parties in dealing with the Maoists, the “masters” in Delhi had no option but to send the warning shot to the Maoists themselves. “We confess that the parties are too weak to stop you; we will not let you take over the Nepal Army, the only institution intact and capable of putting a roadblock between you and the state; and yes, we will not let you fool us with your mass induction of your political cadres in the name of democratization of the army.” Undeterred, the Maoists wanted to take advantage of this Delhi “gift” through no other medium than the supreme body – the parliament itself.

Why did Delhi expose itself at this point? Because, they could not bear watching the spectacle of the political parties for being constantly outmaneuvered by Pushpa Kamal Dahal and his party. They had to come out to stiffen the political spines of the parties and the government of Madhav Kumar Nepal. They had seen how President Ram Baran Yadav was left alone to fend for himself after he “saved” the parties and the nation from an attempted army takeover. Then the Shaktikhor video confession came and went without making any splash despite its explosiveness. The non-response from the parties continued even when Baburam Battarai openly confessed in a recent interview his party’s ultimate goal to takeover the state, ban “unfit” parties, implement a one-party system, and institute communes instead of the free market. This debacle continued until last week amidst all kinds of unconstitutional declaration of federal statehood outside the Constituent Assembly’s norm, a mockery, while the parties stayed on the sideline helplessly. Then there was Dahal who openly rejoiced in shedding blood of one 100 thousand Nepalis to achieve his party’s ultimate goal without any notable outrage from anyone.

This direct challenge to Indian establishment may be a bit too immature, and could be too costly for everyone involved in this high stake political game from a small country like Nepal.

The Delhi message and the subsequent reaction of Dahal at the recently convened parliament have made one thing clearer: “The only players in town are the Maoists and India.” Maoists too have decided to play the game, beginning with the war of rhetoric. Namely, the Maoists have taken this Indian warning message as an assault on the sovereignty of the country itself. To them, it could be useful to consolidate their grass-roots and to harden their base. They consider this to be a much bigger agenda than the civilian supremacy rhetoric. Can the parties turn the table on them to put them on the defensive? Given the past record, perhaps not. At least that does seem to be the case if we watch the lackluster performance of the two veteran politicians’ – Ram Chandra Poudel of Nepali Congress (NC) and Jhalanath Khanal of CPN-UML – speeches during the parliament session. Dahal, on the other hand, did manage to put his message across in a more succinct way. Make no mistake, this is why he wanted that parliament podium – to wage a war of words with India.

Just listen to the way Poudel speaks meekly of NC being on the hit list of the Maoists as an enemy number one after Gyanendra was overthrown. Then, he undermines his own statement quickly by relegating it to some other lesser important category for later discussion. Why can he not demand an explanation from those Maoist leaders sitting on the front? Where on earth would you allow an armed party to threaten and annihilate another party in any democratic political system? Why is he not challenging the role of UNMIN in all of this, including a sleuth of other incidents by the Maoists that have clearly gone against the spirit of the peace agreement? If he cannot defend an assault on his own party, how can he muster courage to stand up against the Maoists on numerous other misdeeds? Khanal, on the other hand, was loud and boisterous and talked quite a bit without saying anything. Where is the outrage against Dahal’s statement to shed blood of a 100 thousand Nepalis and all the land grabs? Can the UNMIN ask Bhattarai for an explanation regarding his state takeover goal? But then, how can you ask these “outsiders” to do your job, if you yourself do not seem to be resolute even on some basic fundamentals?

Dahal seems to have seized yet one more opportunity to up the ante by staying ahead of the game. Based on some printed editorial (including one by Republica), he seemed to have earned accolades for letting the parliament run, which almost sounds like getting a reward for not beating your wife. Nevertheless, he was quite focused in his statement making it very clear that the next battle is about the sovereignty of the country. How far he will be successful in making this a national “mudda” is totally another issue. But for now, during his speech at the parliament, he managed to “increase the size or importance of a stake in a game of risk.” He is very clever in neutralizing Girija Prasad Koirala by meeting with him once in awhile. Don’t be surprised if he comes out in support of Koirala’s Nobel Prize dream, just like how he dangled the presidential carrot to keep him contended while he continued with the political mowing down of his opponents.

But, Dahal has to be very careful now. By challenging Gyanendra directly, he was able to garner additional support from the various stakeholders who had their own interest. This direct challenge to Indian establishment may be a bit too immature, and could be too costly for everyone involved in this high stake political game from a small country like Nepal.

(Writer is Professor, University of New Mexico, US.)

bohara@unm.edu