Protests
Erupt Against
Nepal’s King Gyanendra
By W.A. Sunil and
K. Ratnayake
12 April 2006
World
Socialist Web
Popular protests and a general
strike continued in Nepal for a sixth day yesterday as thousands of
demonstrators continued to defy a curfew and a ban on political rallies
and to demand an end to the autocratic rule of King Gyanendra.
In the capital of Kathmandu,
protesters, chanting “democracy, democracy, down with the autocracy”,
set up barricades with bricks and burning tyres. Police attacked the
crowds with batons and tear gas then fired on protesters, first with
rubber bullets then live rounds. A Nepal Red Cross volunteer told the
New York Times that at least 90 people were injured in the Gongobu section
of the city.
Police also fired on a rally
of about 10,000 in the western city of Pokhara, injuring two people.
Three people have been killed so far in six days of protests, including
one who was shot dead by soldiers in Pokhara on Saturday. More than
2,300 people, including senior political leaders, have been arrested
across the country since the protests began last week.
A Home Ministry statement
announced that police and soldiers would begin a search of houses across
Kathmandu, claiming that Maoist guerrillas were infiltrating the pro-democracy
protests. “The security forces are searching for these terrorists
for which there will be a massive search of private homes,” it
declared.
A general strike is also
in force and drawing in wider layers, including doctors, engineers,
lawyers, journalists and teachers. Yesterday employees from the country’s
state-owned banks and utilities walked off the job. “We will not
cooperate with the government,” a spokesman told the New York
Times.
The seven main political
parties including the Nepal Congress Party (NCP) and the Nepal Communist
Party-United Marxist Leninist (CP-UML) called for four days of protests
from last Thursday. Their campaign was backed by the Maoist Nepal Communist
Party, which has been waging a protracted guerrilla insurgency against
the monarchy but called a ceasefire on April 3.
As the opposition movement
continued to grow, the political leaders were compelled to announce
on Sunday that the protests would continue until the king restored parliamentary
rule. In February last year, Gyanendra dismissed the government and
took direct control of the country, appointing his own monarchist cabinet.
He imposed draconian emergency laws, cracked down on the political parties
and launched a military offensive against the Maoist rebels.
The narrow base of support
for the Gyanendra regime was exposed in local government elections in
early March. The king had called the polls as a means of legitimising
his dictatorial rule, but the result was a debacle when opposition parties
called for a boycott. Half of the positions had no candidate, many others
had just one and voter turnout was just 20 percent.
Commenting on the current
protests, Dhruba Adhikary from the Nepal Press Institute told Associated
Press: “You are seeing people in rural areas—doctors, teachers—joining
in on their own. It’s not going to stop here and we can’t
rule out more clashes. The authorities’ measures appear harsher
by the day.”
Lok Raj Baral, head of the
Nepal Centre for Contemporary Studies, was quoted in the Christian Science
Monitor as saying: “The scale of this uprising is unprecedented.
During the people’s movement in 1990 that brought democracy to
the country, the uprising was significantly smaller in size and scale.
This time, every locality in Kathmandu Valley, and every district in
the country are in spontaneous revolt.”
The ongoing protests are
producing a deep political crisis for the king and his cabinet. While
insisting that the security forces will continue to crack down on opposition
rallies, Interior Minister Kamal Thapa yesterday issued an appeal to
the opposition parties. “[T]he government is ready to hold talks
with the seven political parties, provided they give up their links
with the Maoists,” he said.
The regime came under sharp
political pressure on Monday from Washington to make such a move. US
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack issued a sharp rebuke, declaring
that “King Gyanendra’s decision 14 months ago to impose
direct palace rule in Nepal has failed in every regard. The demonstrations,
deaths, arrests and Maoist attacks in the past few days have shown there
is more insecurity, not less.”
The US call for the Nepalese
opposition to break from the Maoists puts Washington at odds with New
Delhi. The seven parties signed a formal 12-point agreement with the
Maoist NCP-M after high-level talks in India last November. While the
Indian government denied any involvement, it is inconceivable that top
Maoist leaders were able to travel to the country without tacit approval
from New Delhi. Under the terms of the agreement, the Maoists accepted
for the first time “a competitive multiparty system of governance”
and their eventual disarmament under UN or other international supervision.
In a statement on April 7,
the Indian government called for the “immediate release of arrested”
in Nepal and a “return to the path of dialogue and reconciliation.”
New Delhi is concerned at the potential for the protests in Nepal to
trigger political unrest in India and also fears that rivals China and
Pakistan will establish stronger influence in Kathmandu.
While the US, the European
Union and India cut off supplies of arms to Nepal after Gyanendra seized
direct power, China has continued to provide military aid to the Royal
Nepalese Army. Beijing has, however, distanced itself somewhat from
the king. During a visit to Nepal last month, Chinese State Councillor
Tang Jiaxuan pointedly met with opposition party leaders and spoke of
the need for reconciliation.
While the major powers, along
with the Nepalese opposition parties, are concerned that the protests
do not spiral out of control, the movement is developing a life of its
own. Anger over repressive police methods and the lack of democratic
rights is combining with deep-seated resentment over the failure of
successive governments to improve living standards. Nepal is one of
the poorest countries in the world with an annual per capita income
is just $US240 and terrible levels of malnutrition and disease.
As Lok Raj Baral from the
Nepal Centre for Contemporary Studies commented: “Even the parties
had not expected this degree of spontaneous participation ...The massive
participation from the people is more due to disillusionment with the
royal regime than due to love for the parties. People have no expectations
[of] the royal regime anymore.”