Royal Coup, SPA and the International Community: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[ | <center>[[The Nepalese Conflict as a prisoner's Dilemma]] | [[Reference]]</center> | ||
==Royal Coup (February 1, 2005)== | ==Royal Coup (February 1, 2005)== | ||
| Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
On 1 February 2005, in a move not only destructive of democracy and human rights but likely to strengthen the Maoist insurgents and make Nepal's civil war even more intense, King Gyanendra sacked Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, took power directly and declared a state of emergency. Gyanendra, who has dismissed three governments since 2002, claimed he was acting to "defend multiparty democracy and contain Maoist insurgency". But his move had every familiar and indefensible coup ingredient: party leaders were put under house arrest, key constitutional rights were suspended, soldiers enforced complete censorship, and communications were cut. | On 1 February 2005, in a move not only destructive of democracy and human rights but likely to strengthen the Maoist insurgents and make Nepal's civil war even more intense, King Gyanendra sacked Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, took power directly and declared a state of emergency. Gyanendra, who has dismissed three governments since 2002, claimed he was acting to "defend multiparty democracy and contain Maoist insurgency". But his move had every familiar and indefensible coup ingredient: party leaders were put under house arrest, key constitutional rights were suspended, soldiers enforced complete censorship, and communications were cut. | ||
<center>[[Image:Gyanendra.JPG|thumb|Description]]</center> | |||
In a televised statement, Gyanendra blamed the politicians, saying they had discredited multiparty democracy by "focusing solely on power politics". Warning that the country was threatened by "terrorists", he said the security forces would end the ten-year old Maoist insurgency in which 13,000 plus people have died. The then Prime Minister Deuba and other political leaders, including the heads of party student wings, were detained before the announcement of the Royal coup. | In a televised statement, Gyanendra blamed the politicians, saying they had discredited multiparty democracy by "focusing solely on power politics". Warning that the country was threatened by "terrorists", he said the security forces would end the ten-year old Maoist insurgency in which 13,000 plus people have died. The then Prime Minister Deuba and other political leaders, including the heads of party student wings, were detained before the announcement of the Royal coup. | ||
Gyanendra's move was widely condemned by the international community. India, caught off-guard by the announcement, called it "a serious setback to the cause of democracy". UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for an immediate restoration of democracy, as did the British and U.S. governments. Since then major international donors have suspended financial aid and military assistance, the lifeline of the Royal Nepalese Army in fighting the Maoist rebels. | Gyanendra's move was widely condemned by the international community. India, caught off-guard by the announcement, called it "a serious setback to the cause of democracy". UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for an immediate restoration of democracy, as did the British and U.S. governments. Since then major international donors have suspended financial aid and military assistance, the lifeline of the Royal Nepalese Army in fighting the Maoist rebels. | ||
==Seven Party Alliance (SPA)== | ==Seven Party Alliance (SPA)== | ||
The initiation of Seven party Allicance (SPA) was brought about by the announcement of the Royal Coup by King Gyanendra on February 1st, 2005. The Seven Party Alliance constitutes Nepal’s seven biggest political parties- Nepali Congress, Nepali Congress (Democratic), Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Nepal Sadbhawana Party (A), Janamorcha Nepal, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party and Janamorcha Nepal. The main purpose of the SPA is to dissolve the authoritarian monarchy and bring “total democracy” to the kingdom of Nepal. | The initiation of Seven party Allicance (SPA) was brought about by the announcement of the Royal Coup by King Gyanendra on February 1st, 2005. The Seven Party Alliance constitutes Nepal’s seven biggest political parties- Nepali Congress, Nepali Congress (Democratic), Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Nepal Sadbhawana Party (A), Janamorcha Nepal, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party and Janamorcha Nepal. The main purpose of the SPA is to dissolve the authoritarian monarchy and bring “total democracy” to the kingdom of Nepal. | ||
<center>[[Image:SPA.JPG|thumb|Description]]</center> | |||
After the Royal Coup, political parties were stripped off their power and influence by the King. The result was a nation full of agitating parties without clear intentions and drive. In isolation, none of the political parties could influence the population to actively participate in demonstrations targeted towards the King. The result was the formation of an alliance between the seven major political parties, instigated by the respective leaders. The alliance has proven successful with thousands of people backing them for the pro-democracy movement. The alliance strengthened the political influence of each of the individual parties as well. The process was similar to that of synergy and their cumulative influence outworked their individual parties’ influences. | After the Royal Coup, political parties were stripped off their power and influence by the King. The result was a nation full of agitating parties without clear intentions and drive. In isolation, none of the political parties could influence the population to actively participate in demonstrations targeted towards the King. The result was the formation of an alliance between the seven major political parties, instigated by the respective leaders. The alliance has proven successful with thousands of people backing them for the pro-democracy movement. The alliance strengthened the political influence of each of the individual parties as well. The process was similar to that of synergy and their cumulative influence outworked their individual parties’ influences. | ||
Although there have been some rumors linking the on-going Seven Party Alliance (SPA) demonstrations with the Maoists extremists, it has not yet been confirmed. Several prominent figures in the alliance have disproved this assumption too. | Although there have been some rumors linking the on-going Seven Party Alliance (SPA) demonstrations with the Maoists extremists, it has not yet been confirmed. Several prominent figures in the alliance have disproved this assumption too. | ||
==International Community (the UN, EU, US and India)== | ==International Community (the UN, EU, US and India)== | ||
| Line 23: | Line 32: | ||
The UN has questioned the steps taken by the King condemning his actions as a “setback” to the nation. Senior U.N. officials—Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Louise Arbour, U.N. high commissioner for human rights (UNHRC)—also publicly criticized the actions of the king with Arbour reminding the king of his commitment to human rights, democracy and multiparty rule when she met him in Kathmandu. In addition, a statement was released by nine U.N. human rights experts calling for the restoration of democracy in Nepal and the protection of people’s rights, including the implementation of measures “to put an end to the climate of impunity prevailing in the country for serious human rights violations, crimes and abuses committed in the past.” The UN stance is pro-democratic which seems to directly contradict the actions of the King. The UN had made it clear to the King that democracy is the only escape and that he will not receive any support from the UN until he relinquishes his authoritarian hold over the nation. The UN has always urged the King to engage the Maoists into a meaningful dialogue to resolve the conflict peacefully. But, the King’s firm intention of not doing so has made the UN skeptical of his policy. | The UN has questioned the steps taken by the King condemning his actions as a “setback” to the nation. Senior U.N. officials—Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Louise Arbour, U.N. high commissioner for human rights (UNHRC)—also publicly criticized the actions of the king with Arbour reminding the king of his commitment to human rights, democracy and multiparty rule when she met him in Kathmandu. In addition, a statement was released by nine U.N. human rights experts calling for the restoration of democracy in Nepal and the protection of people’s rights, including the implementation of measures “to put an end to the climate of impunity prevailing in the country for serious human rights violations, crimes and abuses committed in the past.” The UN stance is pro-democratic which seems to directly contradict the actions of the King. The UN had made it clear to the King that democracy is the only escape and that he will not receive any support from the UN until he relinquishes his authoritarian hold over the nation. The UN has always urged the King to engage the Maoists into a meaningful dialogue to resolve the conflict peacefully. But, the King’s firm intention of not doing so has made the UN skeptical of his policy. | ||
[[Image:EU_flag1.JPG|thumb|Description]] | |||
[[Image:India2.JPG|thumb|Description]] | |||
[[Image:UN_flag3.JPG|thumb|Description]] | |||
[[Image:US_flag4.JPG|thumb|Description]] | |||
The European Union (EU) also does not support the steps enacted upon by the King. Britain, one of Nepal’s major arms suppliers, has suspended all military assistance. All other EU countries are also strongly pro-democratic and do not see any reason behind the King’s motives. After the February 1st Royal coup, Nepal’s relationship with Britain has deteriorated exponentially. None of the EU countries are willing to take the King’s stand on his authoritarian agenda. The EU has also asked the King to engage in talks with the SPA and the Maoists to find a negotiated solution of the conflict. | The European Union (EU) also does not support the steps enacted upon by the King. Britain, one of Nepal’s major arms suppliers, has suspended all military assistance. All other EU countries are also strongly pro-democratic and do not see any reason behind the King’s motives. After the February 1st Royal coup, Nepal’s relationship with Britain has deteriorated exponentially. None of the EU countries are willing to take the King’s stand on his authoritarian agenda. The EU has also asked the King to engage in talks with the SPA and the Maoists to find a negotiated solution of the conflict. | ||
| Line 29: | Line 45: | ||
The US is Nepal’s third major source of military aid. And they too have suspended all military assistance to Nepal until democracy is restored. The US, unlike other international communities, has always stood against the Maoists labeling them as “terrorists”. But, the recent emergence of tyrannical hold over the nation has made the US stand against the actions of the King. The US has continually asked the King to revise his decisions and steps and work with the political parties to restore peace and democracy. | The US is Nepal’s third major source of military aid. And they too have suspended all military assistance to Nepal until democracy is restored. The US, unlike other international communities, has always stood against the Maoists labeling them as “terrorists”. But, the recent emergence of tyrannical hold over the nation has made the US stand against the actions of the King. The US has continually asked the King to revise his decisions and steps and work with the political parties to restore peace and democracy. | ||
<center>[[The Nepalese Conflict as a prisoner's Dilemma]] | [[Reference]]</center> | |||
Latest revision as of 18:43, 1 May 2006
Royal Coup (February 1, 2005)
On 1 February 2005, in a move not only destructive of democracy and human rights but likely to strengthen the Maoist insurgents and make Nepal's civil war even more intense, King Gyanendra sacked Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, took power directly and declared a state of emergency. Gyanendra, who has dismissed three governments since 2002, claimed he was acting to "defend multiparty democracy and contain Maoist insurgency". But his move had every familiar and indefensible coup ingredient: party leaders were put under house arrest, key constitutional rights were suspended, soldiers enforced complete censorship, and communications were cut.
In a televised statement, Gyanendra blamed the politicians, saying they had discredited multiparty democracy by "focusing solely on power politics". Warning that the country was threatened by "terrorists", he said the security forces would end the ten-year old Maoist insurgency in which 13,000 plus people have died. The then Prime Minister Deuba and other political leaders, including the heads of party student wings, were detained before the announcement of the Royal coup.
Gyanendra's move was widely condemned by the international community. India, caught off-guard by the announcement, called it "a serious setback to the cause of democracy". UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for an immediate restoration of democracy, as did the British and U.S. governments. Since then major international donors have suspended financial aid and military assistance, the lifeline of the Royal Nepalese Army in fighting the Maoist rebels.
Seven Party Alliance (SPA)
The initiation of Seven party Allicance (SPA) was brought about by the announcement of the Royal Coup by King Gyanendra on February 1st, 2005. The Seven Party Alliance constitutes Nepal’s seven biggest political parties- Nepali Congress, Nepali Congress (Democratic), Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Nepal Sadbhawana Party (A), Janamorcha Nepal, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party and Janamorcha Nepal. The main purpose of the SPA is to dissolve the authoritarian monarchy and bring “total democracy” to the kingdom of Nepal.
After the Royal Coup, political parties were stripped off their power and influence by the King. The result was a nation full of agitating parties without clear intentions and drive. In isolation, none of the political parties could influence the population to actively participate in demonstrations targeted towards the King. The result was the formation of an alliance between the seven major political parties, instigated by the respective leaders. The alliance has proven successful with thousands of people backing them for the pro-democracy movement. The alliance strengthened the political influence of each of the individual parties as well. The process was similar to that of synergy and their cumulative influence outworked their individual parties’ influences.
Although there have been some rumors linking the on-going Seven Party Alliance (SPA) demonstrations with the Maoists extremists, it has not yet been confirmed. Several prominent figures in the alliance have disproved this assumption too.
International Community (the UN, EU, US and India)
The international community, especially the UN, EU, US and India, have expressed concern over the on-going conflict in Nepal. The international community has been very critical of the King’s steps and has been urging an early restoration of democracy in Nepal.
The UN has questioned the steps taken by the King condemning his actions as a “setback” to the nation. Senior U.N. officials—Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Louise Arbour, U.N. high commissioner for human rights (UNHRC)—also publicly criticized the actions of the king with Arbour reminding the king of his commitment to human rights, democracy and multiparty rule when she met him in Kathmandu. In addition, a statement was released by nine U.N. human rights experts calling for the restoration of democracy in Nepal and the protection of people’s rights, including the implementation of measures “to put an end to the climate of impunity prevailing in the country for serious human rights violations, crimes and abuses committed in the past.” The UN stance is pro-democratic which seems to directly contradict the actions of the King. The UN had made it clear to the King that democracy is the only escape and that he will not receive any support from the UN until he relinquishes his authoritarian hold over the nation. The UN has always urged the King to engage the Maoists into a meaningful dialogue to resolve the conflict peacefully. But, the King’s firm intention of not doing so has made the UN skeptical of his policy.
The European Union (EU) also does not support the steps enacted upon by the King. Britain, one of Nepal’s major arms suppliers, has suspended all military assistance. All other EU countries are also strongly pro-democratic and do not see any reason behind the King’s motives. After the February 1st Royal coup, Nepal’s relationship with Britain has deteriorated exponentially. None of the EU countries are willing to take the King’s stand on his authoritarian agenda. The EU has also asked the King to engage in talks with the SPA and the Maoists to find a negotiated solution of the conflict.
The most important country for Nepal is India with whom Nepal has always enjoyed a peaceful and cooperative relationship. But after the Royal coup, India’s stance towards Nepal has changed dramatically. It has suspended all military assistance and other forms of direct financial aid. In recognition to the on-going conflict, India has changed its stance from eliminating the Maoists to getting them to resolve the situation through negotiation
The US is Nepal’s third major source of military aid. And they too have suspended all military assistance to Nepal until democracy is restored. The US, unlike other international communities, has always stood against the Maoists labeling them as “terrorists”. But, the recent emergence of tyrannical hold over the nation has made the US stand against the actions of the King. The US has continually asked the King to revise his decisions and steps and work with the political parties to restore peace and democracy.
