Three into two

Nepal

Nov 24th 2005 DELHI AND KATMANDU
From The Economist print edition

A novelty for King Gyanendra: a united opposition

THE battle-lines in Nepal's bitter triangular conflict have become clearer. After talks in Delhi last week, two of the three sides—the Maoist insurgents and the mainstream political parties—announced on November 22nd that they were ganging up on the third, the monarchy. King Gyanendra, who seized absolute power in February, is as isolated at home as he is unpopular with Nepal's main allies abroad. But he is still solidly in charge.

Ever since the royal coup, the Maoists, whose insurrection has cost more than 12,500 lives in the past nine years, have been edging closer to a coalition of seven democratic parties. The king has shunned dialogue with either the Maoists or the parties. Seeing a chance to move into the mainstream, the Maoists decided to pursue an alliance with the parties and, to build trust, declared a three-month unilateral ceasefire in September, which the army did not reciprocate. Analysts say that the insurgents recognise that it is not possible to overrun Katmandu, and may be looking for a “soft landing”. A steady trickle of guerrillas is surrendering to the army, suggesting morale is low.

The agreement with the parties calls for a boycott of the municipal elections that the king has called for next year, and the formation of a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution—with, presumably, no role for the monarchy, or only a ceremonial one. It also calls, “after bringing the autocratic monarchy to an end”, for supervision by the United Nations or another “reliable international body” of the Maoists' and Nepalese army's weapons.

Foreign governments—especially India's—are encouraged by the accord. But it does not herald an early end to Nepal's agony. Crucial disagreement remains. The parties want parliament reinstated and an all-party government formed to hold talks with the Maoists before a constituent assembly is formed. The Maoists, who are not in parliament, prefer a “national conference of all the democratic forces”.

More fundamentally, the king controls the army and the government, and holds the key to peace. If the Maoists return to violence, then the democratic parties will be in an uncomfortable position associating with them, as the government enforces “anti-terror” measures. If the Maoists remain at peace, then there is little need for the government to deal with them.

The parties and the Maoists may regard isolating the king and casting him as a warmonger, unwilling to negotiate, as an end in itself. It would certainly step up the international pressure on him. Cold-shouldered by India, however, he seems to be hoping China will come to his aid, and in public at least, is unperturbed. While his enemies plotted this political ambush, he was away on a two-week tour of African capitals. Perhaps he reasons that his position is safe. Another explanation is given credence in Katmandu: King Gyanendra, a pious Hindu known to believe in astrology, has a particularly felicitous horoscope at the moment.

Copyright © 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.