Ram Pradhan:

Peace won’t come straightaway but it can be achieved “gradually and over time.” And the key lies in intensive, low-key consultations among the stakeholders, argues Mathew Kahane, the UN Resident Coordinator, drawing from his hands-on experience with the post-conflict peace-building in Tajikistan. The civil war there between the forces of the United Tajik Opposition and those loyal to the Tajik Government had, from 1991 to mid-1997, claimed an estimated 55,000 lives, despite a series of peace accords.

However, in the end the UN proved instrumental in bringing a workable peace back to the Central Asian republic. It took the world body a great deal of energy, patience and persuasion. The striking feature of what in the end turned out to be a highly productive exercise was the part, albeit low-key, played by the officials of the UN peace mission, mainly from countries with no historical, geo-political, or commercial interests in Tajikistan — such as Bulgaria.

The UN would only like to help in whatever way it can to rid Nepal of the political crisis that, in its view, has already done enough harm to “this wonderful country, a country that has consistently abided by the UN Charter, quite apart from responding promptly to our call for peacekeeping contingents.” As if to refute the sense in some quarters that the UN, through an intervention of sorts, is out to impose a solution of its choice basically to neutralise the strategic interests of certain powers, Kahane asserts: “The UN Secretariat is not a threat to anybody. We have no commercial, political or military interest in Nepal. Most certainly, we are deeply concerned and frustrated over the pace of pro-gress, rather the lack of it, toward a satisfactory settlement of the violent dispute.”Given the country’s topography, says the UN chief, the Army cannot win themselves, nor do the Maoists feel battered as it is often officially made out to be. “The Royal Ne-palese Army can defend, but is still unsure about how to defeat the Maoists.” He rates the rebels a “substantial force, relatively disciplined and not quite as monolithic as it is generally believed.”

Over the speculation that the Maoist high command is steadily losing control over its militant cadres and that the rebel leadership is not as unified as hitherto, all that Kahane has to say is if the report is indeed accurate, the perceived fissure might lead to some complications including intensification in the level of violence. “Chances are that in the absence of a strong central command, the battle (with State forces) can get nastier and bloodier.” The UN, however, will not relax its effort to convince the warring sides that the peace process can get under way soon enough if they only saw the benefit of engaging in a serious dialogue and, more importantly, the danger of believing in the mirage of ultimate triumph by one over the other.

If the issue of human rights violations in Nepal occupies a pride of place in the UN’s list of serious concerns (vide Secretary General Kofi Annan’s statement of December 24), equally significant but not so strongly stated is the world body’s angst over the continuing loss of credibility of institutions set up under the democratic constitution of 1991. “It is unfair to be dump all the blame on any one party or political actor alone. Senior political leaders, most of whom have had a difficult life, have made so many sacrifices and suffered so much for freedom and democracy, must surely know what is at stake.”