It is said that you had almost reached consensus during talks held at Gokarna Forest Resort and the peace ministry. But the three-party talk took a sudden twist at the eleventh-hour during negotiations at the Constituent Assembly building. Is that true?
In fact, we had not reached consensus during the talks held at Gokarna and the peace ministry. Our President Sushil Koirala during negotiations at the peace ministry had said that there was no point in sitting for yet another round of talks if the Maoist did not show any willingness to create credible grounds for the conclusion of the peace process. We had maintained that the new constitution was not possible without concluding peace process no matter how many times we extended the CA term. We had clearly said that Maoists must detach themselves from their arms and army. Despite that we sat for another round of talks the next day. Koirala on behalf of NC had proposed to extend the term in two phases - one first for concluding the peace process and another for promulgating the new constitution.
Maoist Chairman Dahal had assured us to bring a proposal to conclude the peace process. But we were dismayed to find that the proposal floated by Dahal failed to address the fundamental issues we raised. The essence of the peace process is that the Maoists must renounce violence and detach themselves from their arms. This is to say, the Maoists should integrate certain number of their combatants in the security agencies, rehabilitate the remaining and hand over their weapons to the government. We wanted the Maoists to at least begin this process. The Maoists who were seen flexible till that afternoon later presented themselves in a strong manner and remained firm in their stance.
The Maoists began demanding that the containers of Nepal Army (NA) should also be brought under the Special Committee at about 9 pm. We had strongly reacted to the Maoist demand. NA is not under the Special Committee. NA instead is under the government. As such, NA is not supposed to be integrated with any force. Nor does NA require handing over its weapons to any one. None of the agreements reached in the past have stated this. We had asked if the Maoists were really committed to implement the past agreements. This made us wary over the intent of the Maoists. We had clearly told them that it would be a greatest treachery to the country if they keep violating the past agreements. Two lines within the Maoist party - one that wants to gradually take the peace process to a logical end and another to go for immediate revolt - were clearly seen during the negotiations.
It was Dev Gurung who demanded that NA containers also be brought under Special Committee. Both NC leaders and UML senior leader Madhav Kumar Nepal strongly reacted against such a demand. The Maoists then dropped their demand. Though they rooted for mixed model integration as floated by the Nepal Army (NA), they have only chosen aspects of the model that are favorable to them. We have felt that the Maoists are trying to treat both NA and their army on an equal footing. This is not in line with the agreements reached in the past.
How did the negotiations move ahead then?
The Maoists stopped raising the issue of bringing the NA containers under the Special Committee after we strongly reacted against their demand. They then proposed extension of the CA term for six months, assuring that they would conclude the peace process within the extended period. Koirala then proposed extension of the CA term for a period the Maoists would require to conclude the peace process. The Maoists were reluctant in accepting the proposal insisting that the CA term be extended for six months. But finally they gave in to our proposal. We had also demanded that the seven-point deal be scrapped. We wrote that in ´gentleman words´ in the five-point deal stating that Prime Minister Jhalanath Khanal would resign to pave way for the formation of a national consensus government. Our main agenda now is to conclude the peace process. Democracy can not be institutionalized unless there is a sustainable peace in the country.
It is said that NC also could not stand firm on its stance as two different lines within the party were seen during negotiations.
Yes, there was excessive worry [among colleagues] within NC that CA may be dissolved. Though NC wanted to extend the term of CA only after creating credible grounds for the conclusion of the peace process, lawmakers from our party were concerned that NC should not let the CA dissolve on such a pretext. But during negotiations we all were firm on our stance. I don´t want to comment about any individual leader. Our talks team was led by Sushil Koirala. He remained fully committed to the party´s 10-point demand till the end. It is because of his firm stance the term of CA was extended only for three months.
It is said that there was difference among party leaders on whether to call a joint meeting of CWC and parliamentary party or CWC alone?
This is natural. Our CWC meeting had decided that the party should not help extend the CA term under the prevailing circumstances. Since there was only commitment from the Maoists to conclude the peace process, we had proposed calling a CWC meeting to take a decision to help extend the CA term. But that could not be possible. I do not want to enter into the details and we should all take responsibility for what transpired at the meeting. I do not want to belittle anyone as reports in media have tried to. We could at least have forced the Maoists to hand over their arms being used for their leaders´ security had we stood firm in our demand. We could have forced the Maoist to start the process of handing over their arms to the government. In fact, this is our weakness. We were in a hurry to reach a deal though it was not necessary at all. We could have entered the CA hall five minutes before 12 in the night.
But you have been accused of conspiring to dissolve the CA by holding on to the party stance till 12 in the night.
Those who are criticizing me are those used to advocate for monarchy in the country. People who held a belief that it was wrong to bring the Maoists in peace process and go for republic are criticizing me now. I do not want to make any comments against them. I am committed to take the ongoing peace process to a logical end. I have a belief that the party should hold on to its stance of concluding the peace process as per the agreements reached with the Maoists in the past. Peace process has helped the party, which was earlier confined within the capital, to expand again its organization in every nook and corner in the country. Of course, I faced similar allegations while bringing the Maoists in the peace process. But I worked as per the decision of the party and the directive of the party president. What I have been doing is for the overall interest of the country.
You have been criticized that you gave undue leverage to the Maoists in the past and now you are trying to dissolve the CA.
None of my colleagues have made comments of this sort before me. I have not heard any leaders, colleagues or lawmakers of our party making this type of criticisms against me. Some of these allegations have come through press. I do not have anything to say if such comments are made in closed room or a hotel. My colleagues, who reportedly made such allegations in the press, have refuted having made such comments to me. Therefore, I do not want to believe in the things. No matter what comes on my way I will stand firm on the agreements reached in the past to conclude ongoing peace process. The Maoists now are trying to deviate themselves from the agreements they reached before. I have said this in our meetings with other parties and through press and interviews.
What were the informal agreements you had reached with the Maoists before inking the five-point deal?
Maoists were yet to agree to lay down their arms. There was no point in making fresh agreements to end dual security of their leadership, return seized properties and dissolve paramilitary structure yet again in the paper. The Maoists have made these commitments hundreds of times before. We have lost faith in their written commitments. Our reading of the Maoists in the last three years is that written agreements alone are not enough. The party has hardly implemented any such agreements.
Maoists have been alleging that foreign interference mainly from India was prevailing not to let the government extend the CA term. Any comment?
When the Maoists feel defeated they blame others. This is the true character of the Maoists. When there was a Maoist-led government, all countries became its allies. But when the party was forced to step down all these allies turned foes. What we all need to acknowledge here is that we had taken good-will of India right from the signing of the 12-point understanding. The 12-point deal was reached in Delhi. Though the understanding was reached through our own efforts this would not have been possible without India´s good will. India was the first neighboring country that advocated for the formation of a Maoist-led government by virtue of the party being the largest in parliament. India had been a well wisher of Dahal and the Maoists. The Maoists started to come down heavily upon India only after they were forced to step down over the army chief dismissal row. All the Maoist leaders were present when the five-point deal was reached. Now some of the Maoist leaders have been saying that there was foreign interference behind the deal. This is nothing but political dishonesty.
How will the peace process and constitution drafting process move ahead now?
Maoists must honestly implement all the agreements reached in the past. On our part we are committed to implement all the agreements reached with the Maoists. NC is ready to assist in all possible ways to conclude the peace process. They won´t have to put off any meetings due to NC.
What is the spirit of the five-point deal? There has been differing interpretation in regard to the resignation of Prime Minister Khanal and handing over of Maoist arms to the government.
I do not want to understand anything else. The spirit of the five-point deal is to conclude the ongoing peace process within three months. I want the prime minister himself to interpret the point over his resignation in the five-point agreement. I do not want to focus on his resignation. This is the matter to be decided by UML party, UML chairman, Prime Minister Khanal and Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who elevated Khanal to the post of prime minister. The main agenda of NC now is peace process. The Maoists have committed to conclude fundamental issues of peace process. They should take institutional decision about it.
Related story
NC leader Sitaula picked as ruling coalition task force coordin...
_20191222200001.jpg)
