Cost of Armed Conflict in Nepal

Seminar organized by Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies

29-30 September 2005

The first day of the seminar was divided into two sessions while the third session was reserved for the second day. Khagendra Prasain gave his account of the "Social Cost of Conflict" during the first presentation and the commentator assigned for the paper was Hom Raj Dahal. The second presentation was made by Bihari Krishna Shrestha and commented on by Shaubhagya Shah. Both the presentations were chaired by Guna Nidhi Sharma. The second session had only one presentation authored by Keshav Acharya. The paper "Economic Cost of Conflict" was commented upon by Biswambhar Pyakurel. The session too was chaired by Guna Nidhi Sharma.

There were two papers for the second day, both presented during the pre-lunch session after which the seminar broke off. The first was "Gender and Human Rights Perspectives to the Conflict in Nepal" by Mrs. Geeta Pathak Sangroula and the last paper of the seminar was written by M.R. Josse on "Nepal's Conflict and National Security". The designated commentator for the first paper was Kapil Aryal. Yadav Kant Silwal commented on Josse's paper. Sushil Pandey chaired the session during both the presentations. Since Keshav Acharya and M.R. Josse could not be present to make their case in person their papers had to be read out by someone else.

The seminar kicked off without pomp and ceremony with the introductory remarks by NEFAS Executive Director Anand Srestha and FES representative in Nepal Dev Raj Dahal, before moving on to the presentations.

DAY I
Session I

Ananda Srestha's welcome address:

Dev Raj Dahal: Friedriech Ebert Stiftung has been working with its partners on conflict resolution in Nepal since 2001. Issues relevant to peace have been unearthed and presented to the connectors of the society. Conflict victims in the journalism sector, among women and trade unions are also being supported by the FES. We are also supporting widows of the conflict. The idea of the support is to advertise the cost of conflict so that people are sensitized into minimizing the costs.

The critical choice for us today is not between national security and democracy and political parties and the state. We need them all. People can live freely only if the country is free. Development can take place only when there is security. A change in the attitude of key political actors is needed for them regarding this.

All the key actors have thrown their reformist agenda into the open today. Rational means are necessary to implement them. Macro actors from all sections need to be humanized rather than demonizing one another. When opponents are not humanized, resolution becomes difficult. I hope the discussions here will contextualize the means available.

Presentation I
Paper by Khagendra Prasai: Social Cost of Conflict
Comment: Hom Raj Dahal
Chair: Gunanidhi Sharma

Comment by Hom Raj Dahal: The paper gives a Marxist analysis of Maoist statements. The write-up exudes hope of the younger generation. In reality, what does the ruler want? Whatever is happening in the name of democracy or the state is intended to lengthen the rule. In this age of globalization, we see that many global values are not being accepted by the political actors. Prasain portrays the plight of the displaced people vividly. He also talks about the initial successes of the Maoist movement when they had adopted a reformist approach. Today, he says, the Maoists are imposing their will on others, unlike in the past. They have taken over large swathes of the country. People are not allowed to protest.

The government also cracks down heavily on protesters. If the police did not intervene in the protests, there would be no clash. Even ministers do not understand the nature of the protests. The King thinks that if the political parties are pushed towards the village, the protests would subside, but that is not working.

The Maoist are gaining ground also because of the economic problems. But economic problem is not the only reason. Robert Dahl praises Indian democracy for its sustenance in spite of the poverty there. Why not in Pakistan or elsewhere? What I am trying to say is that because the military is directly under the King he destabilizes the system for his own benefit time and again. Until the bureaucracy and military is kept under the elected representatives, Nepal's problems will never end. I agree that the Maoists must be made to abandon violence and then work to force the King into giving up the military and bureaucracy.

FLOOR COMMENTS

• The conflict a civil war. Can it be defined as one? Only if we do not resolve the crisis soon, only then will we enter into a civil war.
• Mao fashioned his guerrilla theory 70 years ago. It was a different situation in China then. We are in a different world today. Codes of conduct, tactics and strategies of the revolution were prescribed to suit the times. The paper does not refer to them.
• The 1991 Constitution does not make the Nepalese people sovereign. Because it closes the option of amendment, meaning that a revolution is necessary to change it.
• You talk of three parties to the conflict. That is not true. There are in fact two- constitutional and anti-constitutional.
• Is it the insurgency that brought the rural-urban gap or is it the other way round? In Sri Lanka, the insurgency followed economic reforms. In Nepal, reforms came in 1990 and insurgency five years later.
• You talk of the need for the three parties to come together. But they have been trying to do so for a long time. Why has not a resolution come about? Should the United Nations be involved?
• Will the Maoists honestly collaborate with the agitating parties for a solution? Until all the five forces unite there will be no resolution.
• Alienation is not the reason for the insurgency. Alienation was here from before, but not the insurgency.
• Do not equate communalism with alienation. Pluralism is better. It puts it in a positive light.
• Whatever is happening, whether it is the Maoist problem or the political parties, problems can also be taken positively. Because, in the long run, it is all going to strengthen democracy in the longer run. We must take things in a positive light.
• The paper misses out on the issues neglected by the state but capitalized on by the Maoists. Your portrayal of reality in the paper differs from the reality in the ground. It could be because of the recent ceasefire, but still the situation is different.
• How are people coping with the insurgency? What are the changes in the feudal structure brought about by the conflict? Answers to these would provide added dimensions to the cost of conflict.
• The acronyms used in the paper are not right and not official. You say Nepal is feudal, but you quote Chaitaniya Mishra who says we are in a pre-capitalist stage. You appear to be influenced by neo-Marxism, not Marxism.
• You say people are scared of the Maoists. Foreign writers have said the same.
• The paper appears to be aimed against the Maoists. You have to go to the roots of the conflict-- i.e. injustice and inequality.
• You say that the 1991 constitution brought peaceful political transformation. Then, how come the Maoists emerged?
• If we could defeat the 50,000 troops to usher in democracy why could we not defeat the several hundred Maoists? There are about 200-300 thousand political party workers. Why could they not defeat the Maoists?
• Not just communalism, but also injustice and inequality need to be addressed. Demands for ethnic autonomy could in fact develop into secessionist movements if we keep negating ethnic injustices.
• Is the principle of monarchism not being misinterpreted?
• Your subjective judgment appears to be dominating in the paper. How will we be able to negotiate for peace with such an attitude?
• The commentator said that the administration and the military must be under elected representatives. That is true. But why did the political parties not follow up on that in 1990?
• You prescribe reconstitution of the ideology and change the leadership. I agree. But how do we do that-the principle and the process of bringing it about?
• You talk a lot about the political parties and the Maoists, but not the King. You should also analyze what the King is doing and whether it is right or not for him to do what he is doing. The King has been going to the people. Women and children have seen hope that things will come out right with his visit. Is this just propaganda or is he actually doing it right?
• We have to look at the conflict from the historical point of view. People have been sandwiched in a power struggle between the King and other power seekers.
• Someone said that Indian democracy is laudable, You will know how laudable it is only after looking at the kinds of conflict they are having to deal with. [In other words, it is not laudable.]
• The conflict may be costly for us people, but for the rulers, it is a cow rich in milk and can always be milked.
• We also need to look at how China reformed Marxism to suit their interest.
• No one wants to resolve the conflict whether the parties or the present rulers.

Reply by author

If we do not call the conflict a civil war now, when should we do so? The situation is grave enough for me to do so.

The communalism I am talking about is a trend that is developing towards secession.

There is no record that the Constitution obstructed anyone from carrying out economic reforms. I think many positive developments could also have been carried out under the same constitution.

I see three actors in the present conflict and have not tried to give a political scientist's analysis in counting the number of actors.

The conflicting parties did not come to the table at UN's request. But I think peaceful mass protests would force the warring parties to the table.

What I have said is that the way we are raising ethnic issues is pushing us towards communalism. There is no question that there exists exploitation of one group by another, but the means adopted are not good.

If we start saying that Maoists came because of the exploitation and justify their violence, then we need to support the Maoist movement.

I think that Maoists need to be criticized from within the Marxist ideology before we do so otherwise. We cannot justify the Maoist misinterpretation just because parties misinterpreted it for their part.

All the three forces have failed in bringing the conflicting parties to the table.

Chairman's remarks by GNS
The conflict is being aggravated and has been alleviated to the state level and the technological sphere. Inequalities are on the rise. We have not developed the mechanism to deal with them. The conflict is not just societal, but created by the state and also the technology. The disparities are seen in various sectors. Even within the urban sector, there are inequalities within the sector. As the gaps go on increasing they will have multiplier effects everywhere. The society will have to pay the costs one way or the other. If this continues, our posterity will face more insecurity. But, the political scene shows that every actor appears to be more enraptured in the present than in the future.

Presentation II

Paper by Bihari Krishna Shrestha: Nepal's Conflict Displacement, Causes and Consequences
Comment: Shaubhagya Shah
Chair: Gunanidhi Sharma

Comment by Shaubhagya Shah: There has been no people-centred study on the plight of the conflict victims so far. The paper holds uniqueness in that sense. And, until that plight is addressed any type of conflict resolution can remain meaningless.

We do not even have reliable data on conflict victims even with ten years of the conflict behind us. This is a difficult task, but given the amount of studies being carried out and the amount of money being poured into studies, it is surprising that no one has carried out any study so far. I think that this is because such identification and quantification of the problem entails a lot of money and responsibility. So the state can be said to have been refraining from its minimum duty of providing minimum amount of security.

Since the victims belong to one party or the other and that the parties are extending their hand of cooperation with the Maoists at the macro level, it will not be politically right for them to highlight the plights of these people which could be counterproductive to the proposed and likely cooperation.

Another reason is the ambiguous intentions of western donor nations in Nepal. They appear to believe in the thesis that undeveloped countries are undeveloped because of their own cultures and values which go against the global trade and other regimes and not the other way round. It would be difficult to convince the donors that it is their policies leading to such displacements.

The displaced persons are usually villagers. This brings the class question into the fore. For example, the UN rights representative has not spoken a word against the hundreds of abductions in the villages, but a journalist's arrest was immediately taken up not only in Kathmandu but right up to New York. So issues are urban and middle-class biased.

FLOOR

• There are a lot of participants from the sociological background. Some more security experts would be better.
• The seven party alliance is unholy because the same parties could not take up similar attitudes when they were in power.
• The author talks about Indian pressure on Maoists for a resolution. Looking at other insurgencies in other parts of the world, however, if India can influence COMPOSA. Do Maoists of other countries acquiesce to RIM pressure as well? Again, should we be pressuring India or resolve the inequalities and injustices we have among ourselves?
• Would a Maoist-seven party alliance work and be durable and would it help resolve the present-day problems?
• Neither political parties nor civil society organizations have been deeply involved in diagnosing and treating the problems of the displaced.
• Since the committee looking after the displaced persons works under the CDO, it would not be able to address the problem of those displaced by the state. Secondly, the donors are scared that displaced persons may start developing [refugee] camps which they may have to sustain if they get involved. It will be very difficult to maintain reliable data on the displaced, as situations like ceasefires and the like keep them in a constant state of fluctuation.
• The thesis that donors are also to blame for the problem today is not all that true.We need to be sincere in resolving our problem ourselves. Look at the success stories of Korea, Japan and Taiwan, and all that is due to foreign assistance. Why do we look at it in a negative manner? A Nepalese student says that the problems we have is because we are not patriots.
• The main problem is the Constitution [which creates ethnic inequalities]. The language issue lost at the Supreme Court twice. Again, every party has talked about changing the Constitution. How can we still say that the Constitution is not the problem?
• If we are to resolve our problems, we should not blame other countries.
• The author says that India can resolve the problem if India wants to. But it is easy to blame others. Secondly, India itself is not capable of resolving such movements in its own country. In Chhatisgarh, [in India] four years ago, Maoists hijacked the chief minister's car to ferry a Nepalese Maoist leader to a conference there.
• There also appears to be a role of donor agencies in creating and aggravating the insurgency. There are cases where the insurgency has been most severe where foreign aid was poured. Do you also think that it is a failure of the Planning Commission?
• India has been ambiguous. On the Bhutanese refugee issue, we see that clearly.
• What is the message we should be giving the people about the street agitation?
• Everyone feels that there is no organization to take care of the problems of the displaced. You say that Nepalese foreign policy can force Indian policy to work for our benefit? What kind of policy?
• Please clarify the Afghanistan case that you have quoted?
• Manpower export is also a form of displacement. Over a million people have been sent abroad because we have not been able to give them jobs at home. Four hundred to 500 thousand people are the ones really displaced. The Bhutanese refugees are another form of displaced persons.
• Displacement is only one aspect of the social cost of the conflict.
• India is expected to work according to its own interest, not ours. But again, we have also a history of Indian ministers coming to our own cabinet. Are such impositions by India occurring because democracy has not been institutionalized?

Author's reply

The state is not just incapable on the Maoist issue. It has been a historical trait for Nepal. Nepal is an entity that formed by itself and the state has had a very limited role. We need to take the Maoist problem in that light. Therefore, I am hopeful about the non-government sector. The kind of advocacy we need must be designed and implemented to suit that need.

We should first define the problem before we design benefits for the displaced. We saw that on the kamaiya isue, there were also non-Tharus who were being exploited but had not been included in the original data of 25,000. Such problems could generate a lot of complications later on.

Regarding India, we must hope for the best but prepare for the worst. I think the battle line being drawn today will be making many issues last a long time into the future. The biggest defence strategy is to keep our own house in order.

Yes, Nepal can learn from Korea. Military rule was responsible for the rapid development pace there. Today, it is the most democratic country. Japan is different. No matter how much America helped, it was very nationalistic even before the war.

The 1990 Constitution is just a copy of some other country's constitution without many links with the Nepalese context. We do not hear these days about the constitution being the best in the world. I think sociologists and anthropologists should be involved in drafting the constitution.

Shaubhagya Shah: Indian intervention is not just a straightforward issue. The case of Indian politicians coming to back the agitation yesterday shows how far the problem has gone. In many areas of the world like Afghanistan we see foreign backing to regimes. Even our ancient history shows, whether in Ramayan or Mahabharat, that such backing existed. But, the question is whether it can be used to change regimes and whether it is justifiable on the moral ground today.

Chairman's remarks
Many people have been historically marginalized and only a few have been able to reap benefits from the existing opportunities. The openness ushered in by 1990, made information available even in the villages forcing people to leave their homes for more urban areas and even foreign countries. This migratory trend needs to be extricated from the displacement issue.

SESSION II
Presentation III
Paper by Keshav Acharya: Economic Cost of Conflict
Comment: Biswambhar Pyakurel
Chair: Gunanidhi Sharma

Comment by Biswambhar Pyakurel: The paper is brief and is clear on the basic information on the studies and the data. Very few studies have identified the conflict with linkages to human suffering, apart from the surfacial links with the GDP.

About 50 million deaths have occurred because of conflict in developing countries. Nepal has passed Bangladesh by in the recent human development report. But the reports do not consider indicators like women's empowerment. Human development needs to be linked with the cost of conflict in terms of livelihood and the like.

Some time ago, the British Council had conducted a study showing an average annual loss of GDP of over 2 per cent because of the Maoist conflict. Another study talks about 8-10 per cent loss in GDP. FES says that over 60 billion rupees has been lost [in infrastructure]. Another study talks about considerable loss but defines Nepal as a strategically located democratic state [meaning that costs and benefits have another dimension as well]. Some say that installation of high-tech spy equipment can help gather intelligence in the neighbourhood and extending right up to the Indian Ocean. Dhruva Kumar says that there is five billion off-budgetary allocations and talks about budgetary transfers to the military.

Therefore, there is no accurate study about the costs of conflict anywhere in the world. But at least estimates of the costs must be carried out. I feel that an initiation of estimation is necessary in Nepal. We can safely say that the conflict has had its impact on prices, inflation, growth and income.

We should also look at global trends and separate them from the economic cost of conflict. Garments exports are on the decline even without conflict. [One cannot therefore blame the conflict for the decline in exports]. The decline in remmittance is a global trend. Such impact also need to be calculated because not all declines are because of the conflict. Similar roles can be played by government policy changes or policy reversals.

People say that Nepal is undergoing a recession. There is recession even in developed countries but they do not let up on investments during such times. In fact, it is a low cost time to do so. But Nepal is not in a position to follow an expansionary economic policy at this point in time. I think we are in a state of depression. This is why many political scientists are talking about a failed state. Politics might have just destroyed our economy.

FLOOR

• How do you bring indirect costs into the equation, for example the costs of a Nepal bandh? Second, we find very wide gaps in estimates e.g. 100 million to 200 million. That is a huge gap.
• You talk of failed states. Pyakurel also talks about us being on the verge of a failed state. But those with the establishment are of the other view. We also see that arms are being bought at a time of economic crisis. All this is confusing for us.
• The paper talks about ethnic differences as the prime source of conflict. But I see class struggle and economic problems as the root cause. Even the reduction in poverty levels that we have witnessed was not the result of a properly executed study. It does not include conflict hit areas and discriminated classes. The data does not include areas where there is human suffering. The data is taken from mainstream sources. The financing of the People's War has not been made available so far.
• Should we look at the costs only in terms of the government budget or go to the individual sectoral issues to find the costs that have been incurred there. Might it not be more sensible to focus on those directly impacted by the conflict and the costs incurred by them in all respects?
• In Chitwan National Park 4.3 million rupees damages had occurred. In other national parks, 16 million rupees damage was incurred because of the conflict. From protected areas, 14 million used to be collected as revenue and, post-conflict, only 7.8 million is collected today. Tourism data is not available today. A study was carried out by the Nepal Rastra Bank some time back, but it does not itself have a copy of that study. There is potential in religious tourism, but we have not been doping much in that regard either. We don't even have an electric crematorium at Pashupati.
• What happens if we become a failed state?
• The losses incurred through out-migration and suffering are all costs of conflict. How do we mitigate them?

Reply by Pyakurel [commentator]: We can carry out an independent study on this, but it is due to lack of time that I have not been able to do so. First, we need an appropriate methodology to do so. I have been floating issues related with the methodology to find the costs. As soon as we have a consensus on that it can lead to a comprehensive outcome which can influence the government in policy matters. How do we include the costs incurred through injury and the like? We do include the direct damages incurred by industry but there are also damages in lost productions and opportunities.

Other countries have developed different indices and that can give businessmen information regarding investment environment for the future. Although we talk a lot about building the environment for foreign investment, we have not done so far for our own investors.

We need to develop a methodology for calculating the costs to the tourism sector.

Defence spending has gone up since the Maoist insurgency began and social spending has declined.

We have not even identified ways to pay our debts. We have not calculated the costs of servicing debt through devaluation and the like. In just four years, we found the dollar appreciating 10 times. Such trends complicate our liability to our debtors.

Since agriculture and remittance contributed to the decline in poverty levels and since agriculture production will go down next year because of the bad monsoon, the poverty levels will rise again. In any case, the poverty data were collected mostly from non-poor areas.

Author's reply
Most of the data were taken from INSEC sources. The potential GDP was calculated through extrapolation of available data. I think the question on tourism is misplaced as we have just said that tourism is on the decline.

Guna Nidhi Sharma's remarks
The crisis is deepening. The question is whether it is policy, failed institution, or Maoist insurgency that is the reason behind it. I say that even the Maoist insurgency is the result of failed policy and institutions. The effects of the conflict are seen in social, economic and security sectors. Politics is responsible for the effects. Structural and institutional issues of inclusiveness need to be tackled to resolve them.

Regarding costs, there are also environmental costs, cultural costs and even inter-generational costs. We need to calculate all those costs otherwise the estimation will not be representative of the reality.

If we look at our population growth rate over the decades and compare it with the GDP growth rate and also the repressed productive forces then we can say that the economy has always remained stagnant, not depressed. And it is that stagnancy that has contributed to the Maoist insurgency and may soon bring about a failed state in our hands to deal with.

DAY II
Session III
Presentation IV
Paper: Conflict in Nepal: Gender and Human Rights Perspectives
Mrs. Geeta Pathak Sangroula
Comment: Kapil Aryal
Chair: Prof. Sushil Pandey

Comment by Kapil Aryal: The paper covers most issues regarding women and human rights. The topic raises the question about whether gender and human rights as separate issues.

The gender issue and the conflict are explored with international dimensions particularly regarding humanitarian laws. This makes the topic too wide to give justice to all the issues concerned.

The notion that women are soft hearted was shattered by the entry of many women into the Maoist militia. But laws still obstruct their entry into government services like the military. These laws are changing but not to the extent to give them equality.

Command responsibility has been initiated by the Royal Nepalese Army with the sentencing of Col. Bobby Chettri.

Nepal has not been carrying out its state responsibilities efficiently. Agenda 19 passed by the international community is a shame for the country.

Patriarchy may just be one reason for women to join the Maoist movement, but not the sole reason. Some are forced to join and some have done so out of sheer romanticism in wearing a uniform.

Security laws are necessary to safeguard the lives of people. But governments have historically used them to suppress dissent. This is taking place even today. Over 80 laws of the country are against human rights and do not meet [legitimate] standards.

FLOOR

• The paper does not give a clear picture of the situation. When talking of widowed victims of the conflict, we only talk of the atrocities of the security forces. Why not talk about the Maoist atrocities as well? And, after the emergency was declared, and since then, only Maoist atrocities are being highlighted.
• Sexual harassment outside the institution is as important as that taking place within. And those harassments within the institution are not brought into the public. And, in the institution, it is not just the females who are abused, but even males are abused. The Russian army recruits being subjected to such is a prime example.
• Although you say that widows are being recruited, and that you say women are peace loving, what will such recruitment bring about?
• Costs, psychological costs, human costs and financial costs, are involved in conflicts. How much human cost is involved when a soldier dies or when a Maoist dies? Financially, when a soldier dies the cost is about 150,000 rupees for the army and for the Maoists about 40,000 rupees. But what is the cost of the life of a son for a mother? These are not calculable. So the number of deaths is what counts, not the cost? Therefore, 'impact' of the conflict would be a better term than 'cost'.
• The paper talks about women as peace loving and men as war mongers, but even ancient history says that it is women who have caused wars.
• The author also says that there is militarization. What is militarization-- increase of armed forces or increase in the number of guns? But security needs have warranted the increase in the number of soldiers. According to international army standards, one turret requires 11 soldiers to man it.
• There is gender based violence not only during conflict times, but exists traditionally in the society. Both Maoists and security forces have abused women's rights, sexually or otherwise. And no matter what laws you make, you cannot control the Maoist abuses. Security forces are supposed to protect people from abuse, not be involved in abuse themselves. Should there be additional laws to control that? A case has been cited by the paper regarding the court martial of a colonel. But there are many cases where action has not been forthcoming. Please provide recommendations for that.
• The presentation should have focussed on key issues of human rights and international conventions and recommended ways to make the security forces and Maoists accountable to their actions. You did not mention anything regarding penalizing government heads or Maoist chiefs through the international court.
• We have had six years of conflict between the Maoists and the political-party governments. For the last four years, the conflict has been going on between the security forces and the Maoists. If you had dissected your paper into these two categories and dealt with accordingly, it would be better.
• The second part of the title is more appropriate for the paper. Second, you need to define legal discrimination more elaborately rather than other discriminations. The third is the lack of explanations regarding Maoist atrocities.
• Is there a link between the characters of the state and the rebel character or are changes independent of each other?
• The paper merely lists newspaper articles and appears one sided. Has not women's emancipation taken place because of the conflict- for example in their recruitment as fighters.
• What should be the role of political parties and other authorities in playing their part in the scenarios that you describe.
• The psychological impact of the armed conflict e.g. stress, depression and hysteria have been recorded right down from the First World War. They disappear during peace times and come into the limelight during conflict times. In Nepal, this aspect of the conflict has not been in much discussion. Media reports also have psychological impact on the audience. Let us hope the Nepalese psychologists too come forward in dealing with this impact on Nepalese people.
• Had the victims of crime and abuse of power been identified and dealt with in your paper, a future strategy could have been developed to deal with the problem. For example, what is the impact of mass kidnapping on the gender issue?
• If you also include the positive things being done by the security forces regarding the gender issue, then a strategy can be charted out for policy makers.
• The paper talks of non-state actors. But, here too, the Khaobadi [corrupt NGO actors] exist. Please highlight such issues as well.
• You should also include the King as a part of the conflict to make the analysis complete.
• If you include the good things that took place during 1990-2003, then it would also give a balanced view.
• There is competition for recruitment between the RNA and the People's Army. What are the rules that exist in such recruitment?
• The thesis that the civil society is at the forefront today is not a big issue, as one or the other sector comes to the forefront at one time or the other.
• Conflicts exist in the society, but what should be the degree of conflict before it calls for resolution?
• The topic should clarify that we are talking about Nepalese women. The conflict is going to end soon, but not happily for many. The society is male-dominated, not only in Nepal but more so in the northern parts of India. Since men cannot impose their ideas elsewhere they tend to impose them on their women.

Reply by author
The comments on the topic are to do with the mandate I was given to explore. I think the 'cost' aspect is very pertinent and I have tried to show several issues that show the impact of the conflict.

Rather than differentiating victims within the institution from those outside, it would be better to concentrate on victims in general.

Regarding the reporting of killings only, rather than including torture and rape, there is a difference in the two types of reporting. Men are just killed, while women are raped and killed.

Please do not talk of one sex as loving peace and not another. It is against human rights.

Regarding the kidnapped victims, I have said that 75 per cent of them are abused.

I agree that there is partisanism in the press, but if the same issue is being reported by several newspapers regularly, something must be there to warrant those reports.

I know that there are positive factors in the 1990-2003 period, but I have talked about the costs of the conflict, and left out the political part, except for the context that brought about the conflict.

Presentation V

Presentation: MR Josse, read by Ananda Srestha
Comment: Yadav Kant Silwal
Chair: Sushil Pandey

Comment by Yadav Kanta Silwal: The paper is exhaustive and is written according to the author's own perception.

He mentions the Zone of Peace proposal which had tremendous relevance for Nepal. Had it been accepted by all, we might not have had the conflict in the first place.

We are aware of the lapses of the political parties that have lost some credibility--meaning that they will have to undergo some difficult stages before they firmly establish themselves in the Nepalese mind. They need to restructure themselves.

Secondly, the Maoists appeared on the scene because of the extreme poverty in the country and also bad governance. They also capitalized on the alienation of the people but they have committed atrocities themselves as well.

The monarchy has the highest stake in today's game. The direct executive powers assumed by the King has created a different situation. We have to say that dialogues will have to take place with the parties, notwithstanding their failures. Secondly, the Maoist voice is on the rise both in the domestic scene and the international one. We need to therefore take advantage of the ceasefire.

I do not agree that Nepal will be Sikkimized. It may have happened in 1950, but now we already know that India has burnt its fingers in Sri Lanka and China is a rising power [for that to happen].

One lapse in Josse's paper is that he has not given proper focus to the United Nations role in Nepal. Nepal is landlocked, small and has a great profile in the United Nations. It was particularly a marked one in the 1980s. Nepal was acceptable to both the Arabs and the Israelis as peacekeepers in the region. The peace and disarmament centre was set up here in Nepal. The UNESCO regional office was originally set up here. There is also the link between the UN and Lumbini. But, today, why are we saying that we do not want the UN to mediate in our conflict and that we are capable to resolve the problem ourselves. I am a staunch supporter of a UN role in Nepal. This will not hamper our sovereignty as involvement of other countries would.

FLOOR

• The political parties must be addressed, in spite of their weaknesses. Why are the parties against a UN role? Do they have a secret they have not divulged? Our foreign policy is non-alignment.
• The paper is a mosaic of news and views items. Until you understand the art within the mosaic you will not appreciate it.
• Josse does not appear to believe in a peaceful dialogue. He did not focus on the UN initiatives. Is there a possibility for dialogue? Looking at the newspapers of today, the palace appears to be moving towards dialogue with the parties. I do not know whether it is true or not.
• The palace does not accept the Maoist as a political force. Secondly, Prachanda has said that he has no objection to UN mediation. All the foreign powers believe that military solution is not a solution.
• The strategies in a conflict taken from the security point of view includes the geostrategies as well. If we look at what the Indian statesmen said in the past regarding the three Himalayan Kingdoms, things will be clearer. Writers have highlighted the lack of loyalty of the peoples of these regions towards India. There also social and non-military dimensions --psychology and the like.
• The paper mentions the downfall of former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba while about to go to France on a visit. Stopping a leader from going abroad is sheer lack of vision on the part of the politicians.
• In Uganda, prior to the 1980s, leaders lacked vision, but after elections they were able to have good leaders there.
• You need bilateral and international approaches as well as the community approach to resolve conflicts. This takes care of the geostrategic, political and other reasons of the conflict.

Chairman Sushil Pandey's remarks
Political parties will have to define their party lines and other political lines. This will lead to the building of consensus. Both internal and external security, as well as state security and citizen's security, need to be addressed but has not been the case with Nepal.
The key inconsistencies that have appeared after 1990 need to be addressed. The political parties will have to address all these and stop fighting each other.