THERE has been widespread international condemnation of the decision by Nepal's King Gyanendra to sack his government, suspend democracy for three years and declare a state of emergency. Most significantly, India has expressed its displeasure by refusing to attend next week's South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation summit in Bangladesh, thus forcing the postponement of the meeting which Nepal would also have been attending.
King Gyanendra's actions, which included the closing of airports, the severing of communication links and the detention of leading politicians, have all the makings of a coup d'etat. It was only in 1990 that Nepal abandoned an absolutist monarchy and took some faltering steps toward democracy. Unfortunately it has not been well served by its inexperienced elected politicians, whose bickering, ineffectiveness and tendency to corruption have often paralyzed government. In short, while the Maoist rebels, with their ambition to establish a communist government grew stronger, politicians fumbled and failed to tackle the issue and the state grew weaker. The rebels enjoy considerable popular support, especially in villages and among students.
There are equally quite a few Nepalese who have come to despair of the democratic process and long for what they see as the former certainties of absolute monarchy. This is particularly true of the armed forces without whose cooperation Gyanendra could not have declared Tuesday's state of emergency.
The king's assumption of power constitutes a high-risk strategy because it alienates all political parties and many foreign governments, in particular the key regional player, India. It also means that if the security situation does not improve, there is no one to blame but the king himself. That said, the Maoist rebels had been demanding direct talks with the monarch, seeking to bypass the now-ousted government of Prime Minister Deuba.
On the face of it, it is very hard to see how an absolute monarchy can find any common ground with diehard Maoist communists. Yet the king may have in mind that he possesses greater authority than a shaky and failing elected government to seek consensus. Alternatively he may imagine that having gathered all power back into the monarchy's hands, he can pursue a vigorous military campaign against the rebels and defeat them. Unfortunately unless he can win the cooperation of his big neighbors, it is hard to see how the Maoists can be cut off and overcome. Equally if the king wishes to address the rural poverty and privation on which the Maoist rebels have fed, he will need significant international financial assistance. That was far too slow in coming when Nepal had an elected government. It is hardly likely to improve now that absolute rule has been reintroduced. Much will depend on the nature of that rule. If it is unjust and cruel, it will merely drive more Nepalese into the arms and camps of the rebels, outrage international opinion and propel the country toward yet more misery and violence.
© Arab News 2005
