As soon as I posted yesterday, I read a news about IRA (Irish Republican Army). A statement from Gerry Adams was published urging all the volunteers of IRA to disarm. That prompted me to think about the armed revolution. I was ambivalent about peaceful movement and armed movement and recently I was leaning more towards an armed movement than a peaceful movement for a radical change, especially at the backdrop of what is happening in Nepal.
The king with all the backing from the top brass of RNA (Royal Nepalese Army) sacked the then prime minster, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and took reign in his own hand, proclaiming to improve the situation in country and bring it back on the track within three years. He dumped most of the political figures in Nepal in prison for quite a time, and only after a lot of pressure from within and without the country, he agreed to release most of them. Some are still being rearrested and released periodically, as if it is a game of hide-n-seek.
On the other hand, Maoist, self-proclaiming to be our savior, are fighthing almost an unwinnable war (or revolution or terrorism, depending upon which point of view you look from), at least without the active backing from the populace, which is lacking right now. In two of the recent statements, one yesterday and another a week ago, Prachanda urged the legal political parties to form a commonly agreed upon team so that dialogue for the future could be started. And today I read a newspiece on Kantipur-online about a dialogue between district level committes of the political parties and the Maoists. That is a very good progress.
Still, the question remains, is dialogue the way out? As long as the army remains under the monarch and his coterie of relatives, and as long as the powerful countries consider twin pillars, the Constitutional Monarchy and the Multiparty Democracy, as the only option available for Nepal, is the dialogue between political parties meaningful? I think it is. As open discussion between the rebels and the peoples progresses and as it matures with time, the countries that have stakes, either explicit or implicit, will be forced reconsider their current stance. Active participation from the populace on this dialogical process will force them to relent their backing, though implicit right now, from the monarch, and start supporting the citizens.
The king with all the backing from the top brass of RNA (Royal Nepalese Army) sacked the then prime minster, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and took reign in his own hand, proclaiming to improve the situation in country and bring it back on the track within three years. He dumped most of the political figures in Nepal in prison for quite a time, and only after a lot of pressure from within and without the country, he agreed to release most of them. Some are still being rearrested and released periodically, as if it is a game of hide-n-seek.
On the other hand, Maoist, self-proclaiming to be our savior, are fighthing almost an unwinnable war (or revolution or terrorism, depending upon which point of view you look from), at least without the active backing from the populace, which is lacking right now. In two of the recent statements, one yesterday and another a week ago, Prachanda urged the legal political parties to form a commonly agreed upon team so that dialogue for the future could be started. And today I read a newspiece on Kantipur-online about a dialogue between district level committes of the political parties and the Maoists. That is a very good progress.
Still, the question remains, is dialogue the way out? As long as the army remains under the monarch and his coterie of relatives, and as long as the powerful countries consider twin pillars, the Constitutional Monarchy and the Multiparty Democracy, as the only option available for Nepal, is the dialogue between political parties meaningful? I think it is. As open discussion between the rebels and the peoples progresses and as it matures with time, the countries that have stakes, either explicit or implicit, will be forced reconsider their current stance. Active participation from the populace on this dialogical process will force them to relent their backing, though implicit right now, from the monarch, and start supporting the citizens.
posted by dipeshb at 10:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home