Confounding everyone except themselves, Nepal’s hardline Maoists have taken a commanding role following the country’s landmark elections. The people of Nepal have more than one reason to celebrate.
The first nationwide poll in nearly a decade passed off relatively well and was endorsed by Nepali officials as well as the hundreds of international election observers. According to former US president Jimmy Carter, the election was the most “transformational” of the many polls he has observed around the world. The high voter turnout, coupled with the relatively peaceful manner in which the election took place, is a testament to the Nepali people’s desire to cement the peace process and contribute in determining the political future of the country.
The Maoists, former rebels who until two years ago were waging a brutal “people’s” war, will soon lead the next government in Nepal. The former rebels have received the maximum number of seats in the constituencies where counting is complete.
Surprisingly, both local and international analysts had predicted them to finish third, behind the Nepali Congress (NC) and the United Marxist-Leninists (UML), the two largest parties that have been at the helm since multi-party democracy was restored in Nepal in 1990. While experts are busy trying to explain the Maoists’ unprecedented triumph, much hope rests on the newly elected members of the 601-seat Constituent Assembly.
The Assembly’s first responsibility will be to draft a new constitution that can help reunify Nepal’s disparate communities. A second priority will be to decide the fate of Nepal’s centuries-old monarchy. The Maoists ran on an anti-royalist platform, and it is widely anticipated that the first meeting of the Assembly will abolish the monarchy and declare Nepal a “people’s republic.”
But the king still has some support, though clearly far short of a majority. Nepal has had a long history of monarchy, spanning close to two-and-a-half centuries, and bringing an end to this tradition might prove to be more difficult than expected.
The Maoists’ willingness and ability to display a degree of sympathy and respect for their opponents will go a long way toward determining their success in office.
It would certainly behoove the Assembly to give serious and immediate consideration to the country’s deplorable socioeconomic conditions. Nepal is one of the world’s poorest countries, ranking near the bottom even in the South Asian region. The incoming members of the Assembly therefore must address everyday issues — employment, healthcare, education, social justice, minority rights, security and so on.
Suffice it to say that Nepal faces a multitude of flashpoints, as well as a large number of detractors who would like to see this historic process derailed. The success or failure of the Constituent Assembly will rest on whether the presumptive winner, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists), will work collaboratively with the other parties rather than trying to push its own agenda exclusively.
The main challenge for the Assembly is to forge onward, keeping in mind that the road ahead is full of seemingly insurmountable challenges.
Nepal’s earlier experiments with democratic governance were not very successful; democratically elected governments (in the late 1950s and the 1990s) were unceremoniously replaced by prolonged autocratic rule.
So, leaving responsibility solely to political leaders and policymakers this time would be a grave mistake. Every Nepali has a role to play to ensure that the country’s dark political history does not repeat itself, and thus to help move the country in the right direction.
Voting for change has sent a clear message; making sure that Nepal’s leaders follow the will of the people is an altogether different challenge. It is to be hoped that Nepal’s newly elected Maoists have the wisdom to listen to their newly empowered electorate.
Sanjeev Sherchan is senior program officer for South and Central Asia programs at the Asia Society.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE/THE ASIA SOCIETY
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
RSS