Nepal’s House Restoration Proved a Golden Opportunity for Feudal Warlords

Mohan Nepali, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Kathmandu:

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

In Nepal, the reinstitution of the House of Representatives dissolved by the elected minister and approved by the Supreme Court was a regressive move itself. Had people demanded the restoration of the House, they could approve it through their movement. But this was not the case. It was not people’s demand. It was the demand of a few leaders of Nepalil Congress. Among millions of organized as well as spontaneous protesters in the streets, nobody was ever reported to have chanted the slogan of the House reinstitution. Instead, ‘republic’ and the ‘end of monarchy’ became the most changed slogans during the people’s April movement in 2006.

 

Contrarily, Girija Prasad Koirala, who is a well-known monarchist, was made the prime minister of Nepal after King Gyanendra retreated from his direct rule in April 2006 following the 19-day massive demonstrations. The majority of Nepal’s grassroots level people took out to the streets and demanded the immediate end of monarchy. The continuous curfews and suppressive measures stimulated people’s desire to end monarchy as soon as possible. When millions of people were out in the streets across the nation, almost two million people were preparing to surround the royal palace and declare a republic in response to the 238-year autocracy, royal exploitation and terror. Foreign ambassadors in Kathmandu were puzzled at the human sea storms here. Royal terrorism militarily backed by the White House had the general human limits. Therefore, the Nepali changed themselves into storms and volcanoes against the royal regime.

 

People showed their tremendous power in the streets in favor of the abolition of monarch while NC’s Girija Prasad Koirala and his colleagues were still preaching constitutional monarchy.

 

Although nobody in the streets ever raised their voice for the illegal restoration of the House of Representatives, King Gyanendra restored the House. It was NC’s demand. It in no way was a logical demand though the NC always made it their priority. It was extremely surprisingly why not a single NC supporter chanted this demand in the streets. They avoided this demand in the streets while it remained their top agenda in party documents.

 

But as the CIA and the RAW (Research and Analysis Wing – India) calculated that the street verdict of republic would soon come out in Nepal and this would not be in their favor, they exercised to find a middle way. They specifically wanted to stop Maoists from becoming the protagonists of the people’s movement 2006 of Nepal. On the other hand, the monarchy was seeking a final way to protect itself. Thus, status-quoist political forces within the nation, monarchists and American and Indian rulers found a common way: House restoration—a slow poison to Maoist agenda.

 

The restoration of the House restored Girija Prasad Koirala and his corrupt team. The House restoration took Nepal back, not ahead. All parties pronounced Maoist agenda as if their own but they had no intention of working on them.

 

The restoration of the House of Representatives restored all the old, rotten, defunct systems. Everything was repeated. The moral bankruptcy of political leaderships was also restored. Thus, it was a temporary victory of people because King Gyanendra quit his Council of Ministers. But it was a real victory for Girija Prasad Koirala, a persistent power-monger.

 

More or less, other political parties, including Maoists, have knowingly or unknowingly strengthened Girija Prasad Koirala even thought it was not necessary. Strengthening Koirala means strengthening feudalism and monarchy in the long run.

 

Koirala’s history of five-decade political career is related to protecting and promoting feudalism, elitism and happy-go-luck style politics in the name of democracy. Koirala pretends to have fought against autocracy. But he has actually defended the institutions and mechanisms of autocracy cum feudalism in practice. Practice shows thoughts.

 

Koirala, previously highlighted as a figure involved in many economic scandals, has a suppressive character. He is not only the prime minister but also the president of his party Nepali Congress (NC). Not a single leader or activist within his party dares to question him. He has a deep-seated family rule in his party. He has tried to culture Koirala heredity within his party.

 

However, Koirala has been restored and it is unfortunate for Nepal. He talks about peace and democracy and behaves contrarily. This is what tortures true peace and democracy lovers.

 

Politically, morally, economically, medically and historically, Koirala is unfit for becoming the prime minister of Nepal. But he has. Maoist leader Prachanda and Emalay leader Madhav Nepal argue that they were not greedy for the post on the one hand and the international community favored Koirala on the other.

 

The international community in Nepal’s context refers mainly to the US and India. Did the US Administration and the Indian ruling classes favor a prime minister unfit from every point of view? Why? What are the advantages that they wanted from Koirala?

 

In fact, there is no mystery at all. The only simple cause is hat Koirala is more prone to US and Indian aspirations. There is no record of Koirala having decided anything by listening to and trusting the Nepalis. He does not count on Nepali intellectuals and experts. He has always become a loyal listener to the US and Indian rulers. He does not feel embarrassed to use the decisions of US and Indian ambassadors on national issues as his own decisions. Koirala’s politics is marked by such characteristics, which must have greatly served the US and Indian causes.

 

Besides, Koirala was brought up in India. His political schooling took place in India. Therefore, it was natural for him to have tallied his political activities with Indian interests. Equally, he is a liberal ‘democrat’ in formalistic terms. Whether he is a real democrat or not is a logical and challenging question for genuine researchers because of his monopolization monocracy within his party.

To repeat conclusively, Koirala has politically failed several times having become Nepal’s prime minister. Morally, he has proved unfit because he could not respond to several scandals with the accusation of his own involvement. He has failed economically because his rule paralyses the nation’s economy. He is under medical treatment 90 percent of his time and has to rest a lot. Therefore, he is medically unfit. He has historically failed because he exercised his best to protect monarchy while the overwhelming majority of the Nepalis on the streets were demanding the immediate end of any sort of monarchy. Form every point of view, he is unfit but Nepal’s political parties look dull-minded in this respect.

 The Maoist leaders claim they can confidently lead Nepal towards prosperity and peace should they be trusted by the forces within and outside Nepal. But the US Administration has enlisted their party as ‘terrorist’. The Majority of Nepalis have no interest in going back to the corrupt rule of the familiar corrupt parties. They are curious, though somewhat skeptic, to see how the Maoists, as the newly emergent political force, perform. Yet, the CIA is promisingly involved in thwarting any efforts of Maoists to become the major decision-makers of Nepal. Nevertheless, the Nepalis themselves must be prepared to resist any foreign intervention as far as their national agenda of peace, development and soc