People's Democracy

EDITORIAL

 Nepal: Do Not Legitimise The King’s Designs

THE reported decision of the Manmohan Singh government to resume the supply of arms to Nepal negates the very logic on the basis of which these supplies were suspended in the first place. It is not very strange that the Nepalese King Gyanendra chose to go public with this statement after his meeting with the Indian prime minister on the sidelines of the Bandung Summit. More than the arms, the Nepal King requires India’s legitimacy of support. By unilaterally reversing its own earlier decision, the UPA government has actually emboldened the King and the Royal Nepal Army to unleash a more venomous attack on political democracy in Nepal.

Clearly, in the name of combating Maoist insurgency, King Gyanendra has virtually abrogated democracy in Nepal. Any action by the government of India that legitimises such action by the Nepal king can only be detrimental for the struggle for the restoration of democracy in Nepal. Almost all political parties in India have expressed their solidarity with the Nepalese people in the struggle for the restoration of democracy. At this stage, therefore, the reversal of the government’s decision can only be seen as supportive of the King’s designs to jettison democracy in Nepal.

The reasons being adduced for this reversal of policy, such as, India maintaining its “leverage” with Nepal and to keep alternative arms suppliers (Pakistan, USA) out as well as the strategic and security concerns cannot be justified.

The prime minister’s initiative in Jakarta after his meeting with the King appeared more balanced. While reiterating India’s position that multi-party democracy and constitutional monarchy are the two fundamental pillars of Nepal’s political structure, the Indian prime minister had asked for a roadmap for the restoration of democracy and on this basis assured the Nepal King that he would consider the request for resumption of supply of arms “in the pipeline”. However, all indications now suggest that the government of India is proceeding to restore the arms supplies. This must not happen. The Indian government cannot be seen as providing arms to the King who is unleashing repression upon the people in the name of combating insurgency. The attack carried out at the headquarters of the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) soon after this announcement, confirms the authoritarian strategy that the King has adopted. Since the Nepal King has broken the understanding that neither side would go public, India is well within its legal and formal rights to scrap the deal struck in Jakarta.

India must insist on the immediate release of all political prisoners, the lifting of emergency and withdrawal of censorship and the public announcement of a time-table for parliamentary elections before any resumption of arms supplies to Nepal. The UPA government should remember that amongst all strategic and security considerations there is a political consideration that cannot be ignored. India, its people and the government cannot be seen as legitimising and supporting the Nepal King in his designs to jettison democracy in Nepal. On the contrary India will have work actively for the restoration of democracy in Nepal.