NEPAL: MAOISTS, MPRF, AND GON ALL BLAMED FOR GAUR

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 000773

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/17/2017
TAGS: PHUM PREL PTER NP
SUBJECT: NEPAL: MAOISTS, MPRF, AND GON ALL BLAMED FOR GAUR
MASSACRE

Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty. Reasons 1.4 (b/d).

Summary
--------------


1. (U) In an April 12 briefing for the diplomatic corps, Lena
Sundh, Country Representative for the Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Nepal, held the
Maoists, the Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF),and the
Government of Nepal (GON) all culpable in the March 21
massacre of 27 people in Gaur, a city in the Terai, near the
border with India. Sundh also outlined OHCHR's new mandate
as recently signed by the GON.

Preparation for the Mass Meetings
--------------


2. (SBU) In a briefing for the diplomatic corps on April 12,
Lena Sundh, Country Representative for OHCHR, shared the
results of OHCHR's investigation into the clash between
Maoist and MPRF cadre in Gaur, Rautahat District, on March

21. The OHCHR Protection Officer in Charge of the
investigation, Andrew MacGregor, stated that the MPRF had
planned a mass meeting on that date in Gaur, and subsequently
the Maoist-affiliated Madhesi Mukti Morcha (Madhesi
Liberation Front) (MMM) also organized a rally for the same
time and place. MPRF cadre said that, given past efforts by
the Maoists to interfere with MPRF events, the MPRF had taken
security precautions so as not to be defenseless against the
Maoists. Those preparations included stockpiling "batas,"
heavy bamboo sticks pointed at one end that can be lethal.
The MPRF had planned to use force if needed. The Maoists,
however, were much less organized in their preparations.
About 100-150 members of the Young Communist League (YCL) and
the MMM planned to attend the Maoist rally. Many of the YCL
members had backpacks, some with pistols and socket bombs.

GON Refuses to Prepare
--------------


3. (SBU) MacGregor said that people in Gaur, including the
Nepal Police, knew that trouble between the two groups was
highly likely. On March 17, the police had requested 100
extra officers from the regional headquarters in Hetauda to
help control the situation. The headquarters told them it
would provide more officers if the police in Gaur paid for
them. Given that option, the police commander in Gaur opted
not to pay for additional officers. The day prior to the
rally, the district security commission had met to discuss
the potential for violence, but the commission had focused on
security and protection of government property. It claimed
afterwards to have tried to avert trouble by running back
channel communications between the MPRF and the Maoists. The
Maoists, however, had not been interested. MacGregor
qualified this effort by the police as "half-hearted at best."

Day of the Rallies: Tensions Run High
--------------


4. (SBU) On the day of the rally, more than 1,000 MPRF
supporters arrived at the venue, MacGregor continued. While
the leaders of the MPRF addressed the crowd, Maoist cadre
began to march toward their own rally site, located close to
the MPRF site. Young men walked over and began vandalizing
the Maoist stage. There was no violence against individuals.
From the MPRF stage, the leaders appealed for calm and for
the youths to stop the attack on the Maoist stage. The
appeals were not heeded.

Maoists React to Vandals
--------------


5. (SBU) MacGregor said that, within a few minutes, word had
gotten to the Maoists who were on their way to their rally
site that the MPRF had vandalized their stage. Immediately,
about 100 Maoist cadre, mostly YCL, charged toward the MPRF

KATHMANDU 00000773 002 OF 003


stage. At least one gunshot and explosion occurred at that
time, and it appeared the first shot came from the Maoists.
There were also credible reports that the Maoists were using
slingshots and throwing rocks into the MPRF rally.

Chaos Ensues
--------------


6. (SBU) MacGregor said that people attending the MPRF rally
dispersed rapidly. The Maoists tried to attack the MPRF
stage, but were held off by MPRF "security". Police claimed
that they fired into the air to disperse the crowd but OHCHR
could not confirm this (and indeed there were only 14 police
officers at the field). The Madhesi crowd then returned in
even larger numbers and began attacking the Maoists. Six
people (five males and one female) were killed at the site,
all Maoists. The Maoists retreated when they saw the
situation was spiraling out of their control. While fleeing,
some discarded backpacks, some containing ignition devices,
slingshots and, in at least one case, a handmade pistol. One
incident was reported where Maoists were refused refuge in a
local house, pulled out a socket bomb and threw it into the
house. The bomb did not detonate. One death took place
outside an Armed Police Force (APF) barracks, where at least
30-35 officers were on active duty at the time. OHCHR said
that there was no conceivable way the APF could not have
witnessed the murder, but the officers on duty did nothing.

Fleeing Maoists Massacred
--------------


7. (SBU) MacGregor stated that the MPRF cadre pursued Maoists
who fled to neighboring villages. However, he noted that
many of the killings of Maoists outside the rally site were
committed by local villagers who "hated" the Maoists. In one
case, 11 Maoists were captured and then executed a half hour
later in one village. A total of 27 people were killed in
the clash, most of them Maoists.

GON Failed to Protect
--------------


8. (SBU) OHCHR stressed that the state "utterly failed in its
duty to protect" its citizens. There were 358 police on duty
in the Rautahat District on the day of the incident; however,
only 14 had been dispatched to the site of the two rallies
(the rest were at their bases or guarding buildings). As of
the date of the briefing, the Government of Nepal (GON) had
called for a commission to investigate the incident, but no
one from the commission had yet been to the site.

Maoists Provoked; MPRF Lost Control
--------------


9. (SBU) OHCHR said that the Maoists provoked the Gaur
incident by planning a mass meeting at the same time as the
MPRF. In the preceding weeks, the Maoists had broken up at
least three MPRF rallies and apparently planned to do the
same in Gaur. Also, in spite of their peace commitments, the
Maoist cadre carried socket bombs and at least one pistol.
There were several minors among the Maoist dead (one to three
dead appeared under the age of 18 -- one significantly so).
OHCHR did not absolve the MPRF of responsibility for the
massacre, but did not think the killings were premeditated,
but a case of &defensive8 planning gone awry. It was
possible that there were also MPRF-hired gunmen from India in
the crowd. In any case, the MPRF bore responsibility for not
controlling their cadre. Press reports of rape and
mutilation of victim's bodies by the MPRF appeared false;
OHCHR saw no evidence of such activity.

Gaur "Chronically Unstable"
--------------


10. (SBU) MacGregor reported that Gaur was "chronically
unstable," due to cross border activities, including gangs of

KATHMANDU 00000773 003 OF 003


politically and criminally active people, such as the
Madheshi Tigers, the Terai Cougars, and certain pro-palace
groups. There was also a high likelihood of Indian-based
criminal and other groups operating in the area, which was
just across the border from Uttar Pradesh. The overwhelming
feeling in Gaur was that the people living there felt
insecure on all fronts. Antipathy toward the Maoists ran
very deep in the area due to past atrocities committed by the
Maoists against the locals.

Maoist Reactions
--------------


11. (SBU) Sundh stated that, while the top echelons of the
Maoist party had not yet been briefed, it appeared that they
would &accept a certain responsibility8 for allowing the
rally to occur. OHCHR had spoken with some Maoists who had
claimed the top Maoist leadership attempted to prevent the
rally. OHCHR stressed that, while the Maoists bore some
moral responsibility for instigating the incident, the
killings that happened subsequently were by no means
justified.

OHCHR Mandate Extended for Two Years
--------------


12. (SBU) Sundh announced that OHCHR had received a formal
letter from the Foreign Secretary extending its term for two
more years. The only amendments to OHCHR's previous mandate
were the omission of words such as &royal,8 the "King," or
"Kingdom," and the addition of language that OHCHR would
actively support the peace process. Sundh assured the
diplomatic corps that OHCHR would focus on monitoring human
rights in preparation for the Constituent Assembly elections.

Comment
--------------


13. (C) Nepal is still feeling the aftershocks from the March
21 massacre in Gaur. The incident, in which more people
perished than in the three-week People's Movement in April
2006, was a shock to all those who had become accustomed over
the past year to thinking that peace had finally dawned. The
massacre no doubt contributed to India's decision to push
Prime Minister Koirala to form an Interim Government with the
Maoists on April 1 for fear the Terai would spin out of
control. Gaur also was a wake-up call to the Maoists about
the depth of animosity they faced, not just from the MPRF but
from common Madhesi villagers. The MPRF has also been forced
to explain how it can reconcile its peaceful program and
claim of control over its cadre with the unjustified killings
in Gaur. In addition, Gaur demonstrated for all to see the
failure of the Government's law enforcement. We can only
hope that all affected drew the appropriate lessons for the
future.
MORIARTY