Democracy For Nepal: May 2010

Friday, May 28, 2010

Crisis Averted

Madhav Kumar Nepal, Nepalese politician.

New York Times: Nepal Avoids Political Crisis With Broad Deal to Extend Parliament the Maoists agreed to extend the term of Parliament, the Constituent Assembly. In exchange, Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal agreed to resign at an unspecified time in the future to “pave the way” for a new government. ..... Members of the assembly took up the measure before midnight and passed it around 1 a.m. .... Nepal is enduring a rocky transition from feudal monarchy to secular democratic republic. ..... Pinned between India and China, the world’s fastest growing major economies, Nepal needs political stability so that it can capitalize on its strategic location and jump-start its mediocre economic growth. India and China, both desirous of stability in Nepal

You can always trust them to do the right thing after they have waited to the last minute, as they did this time. The constituent assembly's term has been extended. Hopefully this will lead to a new national unity government.

The Maoists Must Vote To Extend The Term Of The Constituent Assembly
Is Federalism Necessary?
Why Not To Fear The Maoists?
A Roadmap For The Maoists
The Maoists Have Won
The Maoists: Thinking Or Dogmatic?
An Appeal To The Maoists
Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?
The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile
Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership

Thursday, May 27, 2010

The Maoists Must Vote To Extend The Term Of The Constituent Assembly By A Year

Dr. Ram Baran Yadav, the President of Nepal, s...

Image via Wikipedia

If the constituent assembly is allowed to expire, the current government is gone, true. But that does not mean Prachanda becomes the next Prime Minister. Then the power goes to the president. The president gets to appoint a caretaker government. That caretaker government might or might not be the current government. Or we might have an executive presidency for a little while. That caretaker government would have a one point agenda, to hold elections to a new constituent assembly. In that assembly, the Maoists will very likely be a smaller party than they are today. It will still be a fragmented parliament. No party would have an outright majority. And we would be back to square one. There would still be need to put together a coalition to form a new government. There would still be need to put together working coalitions on specific items of the new constitution.

That is the best case scenario. In a bad case scenario you are looking at a worse law and order situation across the country than we already have. Already the leaders have made the mistake of not putting together all party governments at district and local levels. That vacuum leads to a weak law and order situation.

And there is a worst case scenario. A dissolution of the constituent assembly could be too much of a strain on the peace process, and we could be back to a civil war situation, only this time it might be more vicious than the last time. Honestly I don't think that is very likely.

But we don't have to see renewed civil war. An increase in political violence is a very real possibility, and that would be bad enough news.

This constituent assembly's life can not be held hostage to the fact that Prachanda wants to be Prime Minister again. Prachanda is not becoming Prime Minister again for the life of the constituent assembly. That is a foregone conclusion. If any Maoist leads a national unity government, that person is going to be Baburam Bhattarai. The Maoist central committee can decide who will lead the government if and when the Maoists have a majority of their own in the parliament. But for a national unity government all participating parties have to agree to the prime ministerial candidate. That person being Prachanda is highly unlikely. Actually there is no point in agreeing to Prachanda as the leader of that national unity government. Because Prachanda's asinine insistence that he is the only candidate shows he still does not understand how coalition governments run. That lack of understanding is what ended his last tenure as Prime Minister.

The Maoists have to agree to extend the term of the constituent assembly. And a package deal has to be reached. And a national unity government in Baburam Bhattarai's leadership has to be formed. That is the roadmap, but that roadmap starts with the term of the assembly being extended. The national unity government takes shape after that fact, not before.

And if the Maoists do not understand this, they are asking for an executive president in Ram Baran Yadav. Yadav would then lead a government that would hold elections to a new constituent assembly. That would be such a waste. The Maoists should not be so unreasonable and bring about that outcome.

Is Federalism Necessary?
Why Not To Fear The Maoists?
A Roadmap For The Maoists
The Maoists Have Won
The Maoists: Thinking Or Dogmatic?
An Appeal To The Maoists
Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?
The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile
Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Is Federalism Necessary?

Image via Wikipedia

The idea of federalism in the Nepali context has been part of the social justice agenda. Federalism was that tool that would be finally bring the Khas domination in the country to an end. But it can be argued federalism is not the only or the best way to bring that about. And that federalism does not address the social justice agenda of other marginalized groups like women and the Dalits, especially the Dalits.

In my last post I have been open to the idea of not having a directly elected president or prime minister for Nepal. (Why Not To Fear The Maoists?) In this post I am going to be open to the idea of not going for federalism in Nepal and instead having three layers of government: national, district, and local.

This is not me now being opposed to the idea of federalism. This is me saying I am open to other ideas that might achieve the same goals. This is me open to the thought that maybe there is no other idea that will achieve the goals that federalism would.

What could be the alternative to federalism? The 45% reservation for the DaMaJaMa in all new job openings in the government services already in place has to be further strengthened. That has to stay in place with or without federalism. That would apply to the army, to the police, and to all the government ministries.

The alternative to federalism would be to have 75 district governments in the 75 districts of the country, and have those as the 75 constituencies for elections to the national parliament using the most popular form of elections in the world.

Meeting Ground Between Congress And Maoists: 75 Multi Member Constituencies
Compromise Formula: 75 Multi Member Constituencies

Why Not To Fear The Maoists?

Image by paramendra via Flickr

Nepal is scheduled to have coalition governments for a long, long time to come, just like India. That might be a good reason to not fear the Maoists. And because Nepal is not about to become a two party democracy like America, it perhaps makes sense to not have a presidential form of government in Nepal, or a directly elected Prime Minister, which is the same thing by another name.

Not only will you have coalition government for a long time, you will also have three different layers of government. One party might be leading the government at the center as a minority party. And it would be very possible that party is not leading the government in about half of the states. It will be very likely that party will not be in power in the vast majority of local governments.

And you would have periodic elections. You might have elections to the national parliament this year. Next year you might have elections for the state parliaments. The year after that you might have elections to the local governments. The party leading the national government might likely suffer during the state and local elections because it did not meet the expectations of the people and sufficient disaffection built up against them among the electorate.

And so the UML and the Nepali Congress need to stop beating the dead horse, they need to stop scaring people with the imagery of a possible Maoist takeover of state power which they do to bring the people under their fold of pre-social justice thoughts. The king used to do the same thing to try and bring people under his dictator tent.

A Roadmap For The Maoists

A Roadmap For The Maoists

Image via Wikipedia

The politicians in Nepal suffer from an inferiority complex across the board that makes them believe a political thought has to be thought somewhere else first before it can be tried in Nepal. Nepal is too backward a country to be the originator of new political thoughts and new political experiments. Marx has to first think it in Europe, Mao has to first apply it in China, some Socialist has to first talk about it in India. The Maoists are as guilty as anyone else.

Back in 2005 I appealed to the Maoists to act less dogmatic, and more thinking. They responded well. But this year they have been in an ideological rut.

Prachanda, Order Your Cadres To Live
After Ganapathy, A Ceasefire
For The First Time In A Decade, Permanent Peace Feels Possible
Militarists Attempting A Doramba Repeat To End Ceasefire
Prachanda, Extend The Ceasefire By Three Months

Prachanda, through his intransigence, and lack of creativity and imagination, has been able to bring about a political coalition in Nepal that is not in the best interests of his party, short term or long. What would be a roadmap the Maoists might want to follow?

Needed: An Ideological Leap

The Maoists went for a unilateral ceasefire in 2005, and that paved way for all the good things that happened afterwards. But their transition from Power Flows Through The Barrel Of A Gun to Power Flows Through The Ballot Box is not complete. They might no longer kill and torture, but they still beat people up. They need to get over that hangover. And they can't as long as they keep talking of an eventual revolution. When they talk of an eventual revolution, their talk of leading a government as a minority party sounds like a ploy to somehow garner a majority on their own, which would be a stepping stone to doing away with multi-party democracy altogether. That flawed line of thinking comes from the Maoists not willing to engage in a fusion of the two major ideologies of the past century. The result of such a fusion would be a multi-party democracy of state-funded parties. That state can be created through the current constituent assembly. And once such a state is created, there is no more revolution, there are only elections.

The Maoists have to come out saying their end goal is to turn Nepal into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties. After such a creation there would be no more revolution, only elections. This they can do unilaterally. The ideological leap they can make on their own.

The step before that big step would be to pass a law that would require all political parties to make and keep their book keeping public. The people have a right to know. The Maoists themselves might be opposed to such a move because then they have to tell everyone how much money they have. Over the years the Maoists have exhibited mafia tendencies to extort money to sustain a certain living standard for their leaders. That thought has also made it possible for the regressionists to bring a lot of money into play into their political operations. The Maoists thought they moved from Power Flows Through The Barrel Of A Gun to Power Flows Through Sacks Of Money. That might have made short term material sense, but it makes no sense for a party that started out dreaming of a classless society.

Give One More Year To This Constituent Assembly

The Maoists should agree to give one more year to this constituent assembly. And it is because the work on the constitution is not done yet. If they don't cooperate, the assembly will expire, and the president might have to turn the current government into a caretaker government to hold elections to a new constituent assembly. So instead of a government that answers to a parliament where the Maoists are the biggest party, you will have a government that no longer has a parliament to answer to. That is an undesirable outcome at a few different levels.

The Maoists declaring a new constitution from the streets would be a stupid move and Prachanda's third big mistake. (Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?) For one, it would not come into effect. It would be just a document, dead upon arrival.

Try And Form A New Coalition Government

If Prachanda does not make the mistake of not giving one more year to the constituent assembly, and he does not make the mistake of declaring a constitution from the streets, then the MJF will likely come back into the fold of the 10 party coalition led by the Maoists. That coalition had almost 280 votes. All the Maoists would need to do after that is work with the Madhesi parties on their Ek Madhesh Ek Pradesh agenda, and they would have a happy majority government. Maybe they don't need a national unity government. They just need to push the UML and the Congress out of power. These are two parties that were opposed to the very idea of a constituent assembly for the longest time.

But for the Maoists to do business with the Madhesi parties, they will have to make these other moves first. Declare you end goal is a multi-party democracy of state funded parties, that after that there will be no more revolution, only elections. Agree to extend the term of the assembly by a year. Then work to build a coalition that includes the Madhesi parties.

Ek Madhesh, Ek Pradesh

The Maoists were originally an Ek Madhesh, Dui Pradesh party. West of Rapti river was Tharuhat. Rapti to Mechi was Madhes. After the Madhesi revolution, their anti-Madhesi Pahadi Bahun chauvinism got the better of them and they broke that Madhes state on their map into five different states, all of them lead by Pahadi Bahuns inside the party structure. Chitwan was now no longer part of the Madhes. After they cooled down a little, they had their original Madhes state as two states minus Chitwan. The least they could do is go back to their original map of two states in the Terai with Chitwan being part of the Madhes state. And they should be willing to consider Ek Madhesh, Ek Pradesh. Why not? On the other hand, the Madhesi parties should be open to the idea of Ek Madhes Do Pradesh. Why not? Chitwan is part of the Terai and has to be part of the Madhes state.

The Maoists Have Won
The Maoists: Thinking Or Dogmatic?
An Appeal To The Maoists
Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?
The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile
Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership
Adhikaar: International Women's Day

Contents 2010

Budget

ANTA Convention: Emotional Bath
Polarization Is Complete: Nepali Congress No Longer A Terai Party
ANTA Convention Program Details
1st ANTA Convention: September 24-25
Indian Maoists
Securing Federalism And Beyond For The Madhesi Cause

A Maoist Madhesi Alliance Makes The Most Sense
Baburam Led Majority Government: Maoists + UML + Madhesi Parties
The Maoists Must Not Return Seized Property
Prachanda Can't Be Prime Minister
High School, College, New York City
"Madisey"

Surkhet Jumla Road
Upendra Mahato, Simon Dhungana

Crisis Averted
The Maoists Must Vote To Extend The Term Of The Constituent Assembly
Is Federalism Necessary?
Why Not To Fear The Maoists?
A Roadmap For The Maoists
The Maoists Have Won
The Maoists: Thinking Or Dogmatic?
An Appeal To The Maoists
Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?
The Infighting Among The Nepali Organizations In America
The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile

Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
Organizing Nepalis In America: Conversations With Simon Dhungana
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership
Girija Koirala: Half A Century Of Struggle For Democracy
Gopal Siwakoti, Kunda Dixit At The New School
Adhikaar: International Women's Day
Adhikaar: International Women's Day: Photos
Holi Videos
Happy Holi (2)
Happy Holi

Holi 2010
NRN Interaction At Yak

Jay Prakash Gupta: Note Of Disssent

Saturday, May 08, 2010

The Maoists Have Won

Calling off their Nepal Bandh after six days I see as a grand victory for the Maoists. They have exhibited that they are capable of experimenting, that they are capable of the scientific approach. You try something. If it does not work, you ditch it and go try something else. First they tried a peaceful shutdown of the country. After they realized they were imposing unnecessary hardships for the populations, they partly lifted the strike. People could move around in the evenings. Perishable goods - fruits, vegetables, milk - could be transported. And so on. I was very impressed. Finally they have gone ahead and called off the entire Bandh itself. I am impressed.

Now that they have shown their street power, the Maoists still have the option to show their opponents their constitutional power. Unless the Maoists agree to it, the term of the constituent assembly can not be extended. If the term is not extended, this government's term is over, and there is a constitutional crisis. Although the constitution says you only need a majority in the parliament to form a government, in this case what is true is the ruling coalition needs the Maoists' approval to go on being in power. That gives the Maoists great leverage at the bargaining table.

A national unity government is still possible. It is desirable. But that has to be brought about through constitutional means. And it will only happen if the Maoists exhibit that they understand coalition culture. A coalition culture is where all partner parties together decide on who the Prime Minister will be, for example.

If Prachanda agrees to the Baburam Bhattarai name, that will give his party six months in power. And if the government performs well, the Maoists might come back with a full majority of their own in the new parliament. At that point, the Maoist central committee on its own can decide as to who their Prime Minister will be. Although I must point out I think coalition governments are here to stay in Nepal just like in India. The sooner the Maoists appreciate the give and take involved in coalition governments, the better their political prospects will look.

Thursday, May 06, 2010

The Maoists: Thinking Or Dogmatic?

Maoists To Allow Markets Open From 6 PM To 10 PM; Transportation Of Perishable Products Not To Be Obstructed NepalNews

This move by the Maoists gives me hope that the thinking Maoists who went from a violent struggle for a one party rule to a unilateral ceasefire and a common minimum program of a constituent assembly have not become all dogmatic and unthinking somewhere along the way. This move makes the Maoists look good.

Although the constitution does not ask for a government with more than a simple majority, I do feel the political need for something like a 10 party government. I am for a national unity government. But a give and take situation has to be created. The idea can not be to humiliate either the Maoists or the parties in power. The idea can not be to rub the other's nose in the dust, politically speaking.

This tactical flexibility the Maoists have exhibited on how to run their peaceful movement has also to be exhibited on the political front. If this shutdown of the country goes on for more than a week, for more than 10 days, it will have gone on for too long.

Monday, May 03, 2010

An Appeal To The Maoists

2005 was a politically complex year for Nepal. The year started out with three forces at loggerheads. The three forces were all at cross purposes. The royalists imposed a dictatorship. The Maoists were waging a violent struggle for one party rule. The democratic parties were squeezed by both. The business at hand was to get the royalists out of the way, and that could come about if the other two camps could join forces, and the other two camps could not join forces as long as the Maoists kept waging a violent struggle for one party rule. That violence had to come to an end first, and a political road map had to be agreed upon. The big parties like the Nepali Congress and the UML were opposed to the idea of a constituent assembly. But that was the only meeting ground. And that is what came to be. But first the Maoists needed to cease violence.

I argued that the Maoists needed to declare a ceasefire.

Prachanda, Order Your Cadres To Live

They did.

After Ganapathy, A Ceasefire
For The First Time In A Decade, Permanent Peace Feels Possible

Then it was but expected that the royalists will try to get them to break that ceasefire.

Militarists Attempting A Doramba Repeat To End Ceasefire

It still made tremendous sense for the Maoists to continue with the ceasefire, and they did.

Prachanda, Extend The Ceasefire By Three Months

That is what made talks between the Maoists and the democrats possible. And then the onus shifted to the democrats. Unless they agreed to the idea of a constituent assembly, there was not going to be an alliance with the Maoists. They reluctantly agreed.

The alliance happened. And that prepared ground for the historic April 2006 revolution. That revolution could not have come about without the alliance.

The reason I am talking the history of 2005 is that has lessons for today.

Just like the Maoists went for the unilateral ceasefire back in 2005, they should now unilaterally declare they are for a constitution that will turn Nepal into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties, that they are for an ideological fusion of the two competing political ideologies of the past century, and that after that there will be no revolution, only elections. They should steer their movement towards that goal. Change of government has to become a secondary concern.

Once Nepal is turned into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties where the book keeping of all parties is public, transparent, you can achieve land reform peacefully. You win elections, pass bills in the parliament.

Power flows through the ballot box. Power does not flow through the barrel of a gun. But power only flows through the ballot box if Nepal is turned into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties.

All parties agree to turn Nepal into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties. The Maoists declare there will be no revolution after that, only elections.
Form a national unity government of the 10 largest parties in parliament in Baburam Bhattarai's leadership. Come up with a common minimum program.
Extend the constituent assembly's term by six months.

Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?
The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile
Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership

Prachanda's Second Big Mistake?

What was Prachanda thinking? That he will get 50,000 Maoist cadres to come over to Kathmandu from the districts, and the common people in Kathmandu will join forces and next thing you know there are half a million people in the streets like during April 2006? For him to ever have thought that goes on to show that this guy has no clue as to what happened during April 2006.

The Madhav Nepal led government will be toppled through parliamentary arithmetic, and that parliamentary arithmetic will never come to be if Prachanda does not make it clear he understands how coalition governments are run. Coalition governments are run through the consent of all coalition partners.

Prachanda seems to think the Maoists central committee gets to make all final decisions in the country. The Maoists central committee decides who will be in power, who will not be in power. The Maoist central committee decides who will be Prime Minister. The rest of the parties need to do what the Maoist central committee decides has to happen. That thinking drives the other parties away. That thinking is what brought down the Prachanda led government in the first place. For him to continue with that thinking and expect a new Prachanda led government take shape is daydreaming. It is politically immature.

Prachanda's last big mistake was to abandon his coalition partners and bypass the office of the president to try and sack the army chief who retired on his own a few months later. His latest big mistake we are seeing in action right now. You don't have a movement. You have 50,000 Maoist cadres having free food.

His showing zero flexibility on as to who might lead a possible national unity government makes extra sure that such a national unity government will not get formed in the first place.

But the real issue is not just about changing the government. The real issue is the ideological clash between the Maoists and the rest. That ideological clash is not being addressed by either camp. The solution is to turn Nepal into a multi-party democracy of state funded parties. That step has to be preceded by making sure all parties make their book keeping public. Why will not the Maoists go for that?

The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile
Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis
A 10 Party Government In Baburam Bhattarai's Leadership

Sunday, May 02, 2010

The Infighting Among The Nepali Organizations In America

What do women in my homevillage in Nepal, the Madhesis in Nepal, and the Nepalis in America have in common? I witnessed tremendous infighting among the women in my homevillage growing up. It took me long years to realize that infighting was due to the fact that the women were members of the powerless group in the village. That psychology of infighting extends to the Madhesis of Nepal. Look at how the MJF split. What the Madhesis are in Nepal, the Nepalis are on world stage. The Nepalis in America are numerically practically insignificant, politically non-existent, and not at all impressive when it comes to political consciousness.

What Are You Doing Monday? Come Meet Al Wenger
Reshma Saujani: Innovation, Ethnic Pride, Thought Leadership

The latest round of infighting going on among the three poles - the ANA, the NRN crowd, and the Janajati groups - of Nepali organizations in America reminds me of the women back in my homevillage.

Organizing Nepalis In America: Conversations With Simon Dhungana
Nepali Diaspora: Rethink Time?

You have to understand where they are coming from. The ANA - Association of the Nepalese in the Americas - rightfully feels that it has had a long history, and that it was championing the causes the NRN - Non Resident Nepali - movement is associated with now for years before the NRNA was launched, although the ANA did that at the level of the Americas, and the NRN movement is global. The solution there is to acknowledge that ANA history, and then realize there is so much common ground between the two.

The NRN movement does not understand why the ANA will not appreciate the huge global presence of that movement. There the solution is for the ANA to respect the fact that the NRN movement is vibrant in all those parts of the world where the ANA has no plans of even showing up.

My Madhesi heart goes out to the Janajati groups mostly based out of New York City that both the ANA and the NRN movement have so far marginalized. Not only do they have ethnic rights grievances going back all the way to Nepal, and going back centuries, they also have proven to be outstanding organizations in every way in New York City. They have many organizations, they have a vibrant umbrella organization the likes of I have not seen anywhere among the Nepali organizations in America, they raise and spend a lot of money, they do good work, all they ask for is equality and recognition. The thing to do here is to acknowledge the historic wrongs perpetrated against the Janajati in Nepal and perpetuated perhaps in the diaspora and give the Janajatis their rightful place.

The ANA would like to be recognized as not only the largest Nepali organization nationally, but also as the umbrella organization of all Nepali organizations in America. The big stick the ANA carries is the annual ANA Convention, the biggest Nepali event in America for a few decades now.

The NRN crowd successfully dissolved NAC - Nepalese Americas Council - that never attempted to become an umbrella organization of any kind, but was the only national council type organization, and replaced it with the NRN National Coordination Committee, like they have in many other countries. But the NRN as an organization does not give out membership to organizations, only individuals. NAC was a group of less than 30 organizations, it did not recognize individuals, only organizations, and it was not open to bringing in more organizations.

What the NRN movement is not appreciating is that the movement entered many countries where the Nepalis were not organized at all. So it was easy to set up a NRN NCC in such countries, and then try and get it to go on membership drives. But in America that has not been the case. The oldest Nepali organizations in America are decades older than the NRN movement itself. And there are more than 200 Nepali organizations in America that are not about to get dissolved. And why should they?

So how do you put out the fire? Democracy and transparency should do the trick. I have a few recommendations.

Create an umbrella organization possibly called NOA, Nepali Organizations in America. Such an umbrella organization has never existed before. NAC was not it. The ANA is an organization, not an umbrella organization, and the NRN NCC is one organization seeking membership from individuals not organizations. The NRN NCC has not been designed to be an umbrella organization.
All Nepali organizations in America should be able to join NOA. Each organization's voting weight would be as to how many verified members it has. An executive committee would be elected every two years. That executive committee has to be one third female by rule.
The annual ANA Convention would continue to be recognized as the premier Nepali event every year. The NRN NCC should use that convention to hold its annual conference.

The solution, I guess, is for both the ANA and the NRN NCC to realize they are both individual organizations, neither are umbrella organizations, and should not pretend otherwise.

The Peace Process Is At Its Most Fragile

Nepal Seeing Major Political Crisis

NepalNews.com

Maoist strike brings nation to halt
Three party talks for consensus stuck on PM’s resignation, army integration The parties have charted six different points of contentions, that need to be resolved through consensus, including formation of a national unity government, compliance with Comprehensive Peace Agreements (CPA), arms management and army integration, returning seized property to rightful owners, transformation or dissolution of Maoist youth wing Young Communist League (YCL) and commitment to peace process.
UCPN (M)'s May Day demos conclude peacefully, Dahal describes protests as 'final push'
Three-party meet adjourned 'on a positive note' Dr Bhattarai said the three parties have reached consensus on four of the six agendas set earlier. "Now, we will be discussing on constitution making and power sharing in new government,"
EU deeply concerned over lack of progress in peace process the rising political tensions in Nepal over the last few weeks.
22-party, HLPM task force meetin Leaders of parties in the government including CPN (UML), Nepali Congress, Madhesi Janadhikar Forum-Loktantrik are discussing on whether or not to deploy army to quell the agitation.
Normal life affected due to Maoist demonstrations; Maoists to rally from 18 places in capital most people have chosen to stay at back at home. The streets look quieter, except for the Maoist cadres and others preparing for the rally. .... The Maoists are preparing to rally from 18 different locations in Kathmandu including Kalanki, Maharajgunj, Chabahil, Koteshwar, Gongabu, Balaju and Balkhu from 11 am, this morning.
Leaders claim, they are close to consensus Maoist chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal and vice chairmen Babu Ram Bhattarai and Mohan Baidhya, CPN (UML) chairman Jhala Nath Khanal and politburo members Bharat Mohan Adhikary and Ishwar Pokhrel, and NC vice president Ram Chandra Poudel and leaders Bimalendra Nidhi and Krishna Sitaula were present at the meeting.
More than half a million people set to hit streets during UCPN-M's May day demo, Bhattarai claims thousands of Maoist volunteers will be deployed to manage the crowd to ensure that the mass demonstration of the party goes on smoothly..... The meeting of the council on Friday decided to deploy Nepal Army in sensitive areas including the airport, hydropower plants and telephone towers. Nepal Police and Armed Police Forced were deployed for their security previously. ..... defence minister Bidhya Bhandari told reporters that government might bring Nepal Army out of the barracks if Maoist demonstrations turn violent and goes out of control.
NSC hands over infrastructure security responsibility to NA
NC for deploying army, if needed government cannot be replaced from the streets
UML politburo throws weight behind PM Nepal The two-hour long meeting of the politburo concluded that PM Nepal's resignation alone would not solve the current problem and that the government cannot be changed through street protests... Majority of the politburo members including party chairman Jhala Nath Khanal, Prime Minister Nepal and senior leader KP Sharma Oli were present at the meeting.

Pages

Friday, May 28, 2010

Related articles by Zemanta

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Related articles by Zemanta

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Related articles by Zemanta

Related articles by Zemanta

Related articles by Zemanta

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Thursday, May 06, 2010

Monday, May 03, 2010

Sunday, May 02, 2010