SHOCKWAVES FOLLOW EIGHT-POINT AGREEMENT

C O N F I D E N T I A L KATHMANDU 001597 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/20/2016 TAGS: PGOV PTER NP SUBJECT: SHOCKWAVES FOLLOW EIGHT-POINT AGREEMENT REF: A. KATHMANDU 1576 ¶B. KATHMANDU 1582 Classified By: Acting Deputy Chief of Mission Larry Schwartz. Reasons 1.4 (b/d). SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) Political party members and commentators have launched a storm of protests against the eight-point agreement Maoist leader Prachanda and Prime Minister G. P. Koirala announced on June 16. While party leaders expressed hope that the agreement might lead to peace, they also expressed disappointment about the prospect of the dissolution of Parliament and the vagueness about provisions dealing with the management of arms, and expressed anger that they had not been consulted during the process. Media analysts laid out three major disagreements between party members and the Maoists, particularly in regard to the timing of the dissolution of Parliament and arms control. Maoist actions and intimidation tactics suggest that they are confident that they have the upper hand in negotiation with the government, creating a quandary for the seven-party alliance and its next steps. End Summary. CONTENTIONS AGAINST INTERIM GOVERNMENT -------------- ¶2. (C) Shockwaves from the agreement on June 16 between Prime Minister G. P. Koirala and Maoist leader Prachanda to form an interim government (Ref A) continued to spread through Kathmandu as members of the political party alliance voiced concerns about government concessions to the Maoists. Politicians' primary complaint mirrored Nepali Congress-Democratic (NC-D) chairman Sher Bahadur Deuba's comments to Charge d'Affaires (Ref B) that the eight-point agreement lacked transparency to party members and failed to provide a solution to Maoist disarmament and monitoring. Even an informal meeting of the Central Working Committee of Koirala's Nepali Congress (NC) concluded the party leadership's decision undermined the wishes of party members, according to press reporting. The members overwhelmingly derided the agreement for not addressing the issue of Maoist disarmament as a prerequisite for the interim government. NC members also opposed the proposed dissolution of Parliament without a representative body to replace it. MAJOR DIFFERENCES REMAIN: ARMS AND PARLIAMENT -------------- ¶3. (U) The English-language daily Kathmandu Post interviewed members of the government and Maoist negotiating teams and on June 20 published a front-page analysis of three key issues on which the two sides' interpretations of the signed agreement differed: a) What is the right platform to promulgate the interim constitution? b) When will the House of Representatives be dissolved? c) Will the interim government be formed before the UN has a mechanism in place for arms management and monitoring? Speaker of the House Subash Nemwang and Minister of Local Development Pradeep Gyawali said the House would promulgate an interim constitution, while Maoist negotiator Dinanath Sharma opposed parliamentary involvement. The Seven-Party Alliance favored an interim sovereign body to be in place before the Parliament dissolves, while Sharma advocated immediate dissolution upon promulgation of the interim constitution. The most contentious issue was that of Maoist arms. The Maoists argued that the arms issue should not delay startup of the interim government, especially because UN involvement will take time, while the government maintained that arms management is essential before the Maoists can join the mainstream. Sharma conceded that interim government may not be formed within a month. A senior government minister said that the interim government could begin operation by September at the earliest. ¶4. (C) Lilamani Pokharel, Vice President of the People's Front Nepal--the party in the alliance with the closest ties to the Maoists--stated that negotiation between the parties and the Maoists regarding the promulgation of the interim constitution should take place first. He added that because the Parliament was still intact, it would be the body to endorse the constitution. He further explained that the Speaker of the House would sign the interim government once it was tabled in the Parliament. If the Parliament were already dissolved, a mechanism established by an all-party conference would promulgate the constitution--but Pokharel emphasized that Parliament should be dissolved only after the promulgation of the interim constitution, formation of the interim government, and announcement of the date for constituent assembly elections. Pokharel argued that the formation of the interim government and the management of arms would have to proceed simultaneously, not chronologically, because it could take months before the constitution was ratified and the government formed. Separately, Jhalanath Khanal, Central Committee Member of the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), told Emboff that while no date had been set to dissolve Parliament, it could happen only after the promulgation of the interim constitution. He also said that the UN should first manage both Maoist and government arms before the interim government could be formed. Subodh Pyakurel, President of local human rights NGO INSEC, stressed that dissolving Parliament without an alternate mechanism would be a disaster. ¶5. (C) While political parties have hailed the agreement as an opening for peace, their concerns about the transparency of the process for reaching agreement and also the details of the agreement are being widely voiced. The Rastriya Janashakti Party welcomed the eight-point agreement between the government and the Maoists, although Surya Bahadur Thapa, party chairman and former Prime Minster, stated that the settlement of arms must be addressed before constituent assembly elections could occur. Thapa also said that there were no grounds for dissolving Parliament, which had been reinstated with high expectations and was making major political decisions. The Rastriya Prajatantra Party in its criticism of the eight-point agreement also cited concern over comments Maoist leaders made against Nepalese security forces at the June 16 press conference and the lack of any mention of the people killed, injured, and displaced during the ten-year armed insurgency. PARLIAMENT GRILLS HOME MINISTER -------------- ¶6. (U) The peace process monitoring committee of the House of Representatives, headed by Speaker of the House Subash Nemwang, summoned Home Minister Krishna Sitaula on June 19 and complained that the government signed the eight-point agreement with the Maoists in haste. The committee protested the agreement to dissolve Parliament and the failure of the government to address the implementation of previous pacts and the code of conduct with the Maoists. Members of Parliament were angered by the government's lack of support for the House after the latter had taken action to end King Gyanendra's political powers and pave the way for constituent assembly elections. The monitoring committee reiterated to Sitaula that settling the arms issue before the Maoists could join the government was a basic precondition for the peace process. MAOISTS PUSH INTO GOVERNMENT AND TORTURE YOUTHS -------------- -- ¶7. (U) Maoists continued intimidation tactics despite the eight-point agreement with Koirala and in violation of the May 26 Code of Conduct. For the first time, the Maoists forcibly took over a government post by appointing Bishnu Lamichhane, vice-chairman of the Maoist people's government, as acting president of the Parbat district committee (DDC) in western Nepal. The rebels claimed that they deserved recognition as a peaceful political party with equal participation in all district activities and said the appointment was in response to their exclusion from DDC meetings and budgetary decisions. Local leaders of the NC, NC-D, and the CPN-UML described the decision as condemnable and counterproductive to establishing mutual trust during the peace process. In another incident on June 19, Maoist cadre reportedly kidnapped two men near Kathmandu and tortured them to near death. THE PR CAMPAIGNS -------------- ¶8. (C) While the government faces criticism from all sides and the Prime Minister is absent from the country, the Maoists have started their public relations campaign to explain their actions and garner support. Prachanda and Mahara have traveled to Doti (far-western Nepal) to start briefing their cadre on their actions to date. In doing so, they continue to outflank the seven-party alliance with the perception of "consultation." In response to protests by women pushing for adequate representation in the peace process, the Maoists suggested that three women Maoist lawyers be added to the team drafting the interim constitution. The government has yet to react. Meanwhile, women in politics planned to protest at the party offices of each political party throughout the week to ensure more representation. GOVERNMENT DELAYS LETTER FOR UN ASSISTANCE -------------- ¶9. (U) The government planned to send a letter to the UN requesting human rights and arms decommissioning monitors (Ref A),but on June 19 decided to delay the request because of "inadequate homework." A government source told local press that the letter could be postponed until next week, when Prime Minister Koirala returns from receiving medical treatment in Bangkok. COMMENT -------------- ¶10. (C) PM Koirala's surprise agreement with Prachanda suggests that the Prime Minister, who is in poor health, is increasingly desperate to leave a political legacy. The breadth and complexity of the agreements and committee structures this peace process now encompasses suggest that the PM may not entirely be in control. He may believe that he has the best chance for bringing the Maoists into the mainstream--as a unit and avoiding splintering--if he were unhindered by the need to reach a consensus with the very political parties that bickered through previous attempts at democracy. Yet despite disagreements that delayed the formation of Koirala's cabinet, the seven-party alliance has managed to remain united and cooperate enough to enact changes unseen in Nepal's recent political history. This dizzying pace of reform will not be sustainable if the political parties begin to feel marginalized from the peace process and push back against Koirala. ¶11. (C) Koirala's fellow members in the alliance are faced with a quandary. They know they must welcome the eight-point agreement because open opposition would make them appear as if they opposed the peace process. However, the politicos and civil society remain concerned about Maoist intentions and that the eight-point agreement does nothing to allay these concerns. Disagreements about timing and sequencing of the roadmap agreed upon are widespread. We will be stressing to the Prime Minister and the political parties to keep their red line of not allowing the Maoists into the political process until they give up their weapons. That the Maoists feel bold enough to take over a district committee and troll around the capital city is a worrying indicator that they believe they have the upper hand. MORIARTY