NEPAL: A/S BLAKE URGES PROGRESS ON PEACE PROCESS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 000535

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/19/2019
TAGS: PREL PTER KDEM UN UK NP
SUBJECT: NEPAL: A/S BLAKE URGES PROGRESS ON PEACE PROCESS
AND GOVERNMENT FORMATION

REF: A. KATHMANDU 522

B. KATHMANDU 471

Classified By: Ambassador Nancy J. Powell. Reasons 1.4 (b/d)

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


1. (C) In a June 12 lunch meeting with representatives from
three of the four major parties and at an evening reception
with a broad group of Nepali leaders, visiting Assistant
Secretary Robert Blake encouraged parties and institutions to
work together to complete the peace process, including
drafting the new constitution. He urged the governing
coalition to move quickly to name the rest of the cabinet so
the work on the peace process could begin. The Assistant
Secretary found a wide range of views among the parties and
others; some expected the new government would not last. In
a morning meeting on June 13, the former UN Mission in Nepal
(UNMIN) deputy special representative, the UNMIN
representative, and the British Charge d'Affaires highlighted
their concerns about Nepal's current situation and UNMIN's
future role.

Everyone Wants Peace
--------------


2. (C) In a lunch meeting on June 12 with representatives of
the three of the four largest parties, visiting Assistant
Secretary for South and Central Asia Robert Blake encouraged
all of the parties to work together to complete the peace
process. Former Minister of Tourism and Civil Aviation
Minister Hisila Yami (Maoist) and newly appointed Minister
without Portfolio Minendra Rijal (Nepali Congress or NC)
frequently expressed diametrically opposed views on how
Nepal's peace process had gotten into its current logjam, but
they agreed some way forward had to be found. Madhesi
People's Rights Forum (MPRF) chairman and former Foreign
Minister Upendra Yadav shared that view. Similarly, at an
evening reception, Assistant Secretary Blake took the
opportunity to discuss with a broad group of leaders,
including Constituent Assembly (CA) Chairman Subash Nemwang,
Deputy Prime Minister Bijay Gachhadar (MPRF),Minister
without Portfolio Prakash Mahat (NC) and several senior civil
servants, among others, the prospects for peace. (Note: On
June 17, Rijal was named Minister for Constituent Assembly
Affairs and Mahat was named Energy Minister. Ref A.)

Drafting a Federal Constitution
--------------


3. (C) Yami described the familiar challenges Nepal faces in
drafting a new constitution: disagreements about the type of
executive (presidential vs. prime ministerial) and
differences about how to draw the map of the new federal
Nepal and to allocate powers between the center and the
states. Yadav noted that the MPRF wanted a presidential
system -- like the one in the United States -- and strong
states (what he called "autonomous states") as in the U.S.
system, not the weaker ones that existed in India. Rijal
argued for the Westminster system, at least for now, in order
to avoid the risk of an overly strong executive, and to force
the government to seek the support of the Parliament. Yadav
was convinced that the Maoists and the NC would team up to
prevent the Madhesis from having a unified Madhes state.
However, after some back and forth, Rijal said he, for one,
was prepared to support a Madhes state if, as Yadav
maintained, the MPRF supported a bicameral parliament with
one chamber for the states (like the U.S. Senate) and one
chamber based on population (like the U.S. House of
Representatives). According to Rijal, the bigger issue was
the Maoists' commitment to multiparty democracy, human rights
and private property.

Forming a Government
--------------


KATHMANDU 00000535 002 OF 003



4. (C) At the lunch and the reception, the Assistant
Secretary emphasized the importance of the coalition
completing the cabinet quickly. Yami, who can be outspoken
in other fora, was mild in her criticism of the way in which
the Maoists' former coalition partner, the Communist Party of
Nepal - United Marxist Leninist (UML),had teamed up with the
NC to elect M.K. Nepal as the new Prime Minister a few weeks
earlier. Yadav was more blunt. He accused the NC and UML of
conspiring to split his party by tapping his party rival,
Bijay Gachhadar, to become Deputy Prime Minister (Ref B).
Yadav said he had no faith in a government which was headed
by a man (Nepal) who was defeated in both the CA races he
contested. The Defense Minister (Bijaya Bhandari, UML) and
the Foreign Minister (Sujata Koirala, NC) were other
ministers whom the voters had rejected. He predicted that
the government would not last long. Yami, too, had doubts.
Rijal conceded that it was proving difficult to name the
cabinet. He claimed that the NC and UML, however, were close
to a deal on allocating portfolios among themselves.

UN Views on Peace Process, Government
--------------


5. (C) At a morning meeting on June 13, former UN Mission in
Nepal (UNMIN) Deputy Special Representative Tamrat Samuel
stated to Assistant Secretary Blake that the challenge was to
find a way to get the peace process moving forward again.
Samuel, who is presently Director for Asia and the Pacific in
the UN Department of Political Affairs, said one idea is to
form a high-level political committee. However, the Maoists
had already told the UN they saw no point in participating as
long as they were outside the government. The Maoists, he
added, were bent on bringing down the new coalition. UNMIN
Representative Karin Landgren noted that UNMIN had drafted a
guardedly optimistic interim report to the UN Security
Council in April and then the situation had gone "haywire."
The new coalition needed to decide what it was going to do
about the crucial Special Committee on Supervision,
Integration and Rehabilitation of Maoist Combatants. For
starters, who would convene it? Landgren said the Maoists
wanted 3-7,000 of the combatants integrated into the Nepal
Army, but arrangements would have to be made for the rest and
for the disqualified. Some politicians were talking about
giving them cash, which was a bad idea.

Future of UNMIN
--------------


6. (C) Samuel and Landgren indicated that PM Nepal as well as
the other major party leaders believed it was too soon for
UNMIN to leave when its mandate expired in July. Samuel
thought the Security Council members felt the same way.
British Charge d'Affaires Sophia Willitts-King interjected
that before the Maoist-led government fell, London had been
keen to see UNMIN leave in July. In part, this was due to
budgetary pressure in the UK, but it also reflected concern
about the lack of movement in the peace process. It was
important that the Nepalis not take UN support for granted.
After the fall of the government, London had started to
reconsider its position. The British delegation in New York
was likely to question strongly why UNMIN was being extended,
but then vote in favor -- after taking a tough line that this
extension would be the last. Samuel agreed that it was
difficult to persuade the Nepalis to take any threats to
withdraw seriously. The Nepalis figured that the UN might
bluster, but in the end it would not walk away. Blake
remarked that he had detected little sense of urgency among
Nepali leaders.

U.S. Public Stance on UNMIN
--------------


7. (U) At a June 13 press conference, in response to a
question about the U.S. position on extension of the UNMIN
mandate, A/S Blake stated that the U.S. is following UNMIN's
work closely and considers those activities to be very
important. However, Nepal "should not think that there will

KATHMANDU 00000535 003 OF 003


be unlimited patience on the part of the international
community" to continue supporting UNMIN's operations into the
future. UNMIN, he said, is quite expensive for the U.S. and
other donors to fund. He stressed that Nepalis need to show
they are "truly committed to achieving progress" in the peace
process. Progress would provide the basis for further
support.

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


8. (C) Finding consensus to form the government, integrate
the Maoist combatants and draft the new constitution would be
extremely difficult for any Prime Minister in the current
circumstances in Nepal. M.K. faces those challenges without
the benefit of a popular mandate. He also does not have much
time.
POWELL