Latest news with #NepaliCongress
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Corruption charges against Home Minister are latest in a list of the growing problems for Nepal's government
Militancy, violence and a low tolerance for dissent have been major features of Nepali politics. These tendencies have been at the fore of late. Last week, Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda appealed to the Young Communist League to crush the monarchists. Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli, who heads the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), asked his party's youth wing — Yuba Sangh — to resist those who want to transform Nepal back into a Hindu kingdom. Sher Bahadur Deuba, Chairman of the Nepali Congress, did not exhibit such militancy, but he was arguably more intolerant of dissent. 'It was our goodwill that we let the former King stay in the republic of Nepal,' he said. These expressions, by the leaders of the three biggest parties that have controlled the political system since 2006, have legitimised the use of violence as a means to bring about change. The Maoists, who had led a decade-long insurgency from 1996 to 2006 which claimed more than 17,000 lives, wants history to see them as the main contributor to Nepal's switch to a secular republic from a Hindu kingdom. The Nepali Congress and the UML, too, want to be seen as revolutionary forces in the making of the Constitution. Two days after Prachanda's appeal, Young Communist League cadres pelted a crowd with stones as it assembled to pay homage to the late King Birendra and his family members on the 24th anniversary of the royal massacre. State security agencies were unprecedentedly ruthless in their response to the street rally, following the Prime Minister's appeal that no protocol needed to be followed in dealing with the protest. Kamal Thapa (70), once a Deputy Prime Minister under Oli, was pounded, knocked down and then dragged through the streets for a few feet before being pushed into a police van. While a coalition of the UML and Nepali Congress governs through the central secretariat (Singha Durbar), militant youth wings affiliated to political parties are vying to capture the streets. A lack of clarity within the movement's leadership has led its youth participants to resort to violence. As a compromise, the leadership has agreed to recruit more youth, build the movement at the local level and then march on Kathmandu. How far the movement led by conservative forces against militant and intolerant parties and the state will go is one thing, but the people unhappy with the current system and its leaders — both in the regime and the Opposition — far outnumber its supporters. Prachanda calls Prime Minister Oli the 'most corrupt'. The entire opposition, mainly the Maoists and Rastriya Prajatantra Party, paralysed the House of Representatives during the first week of its session, demanding that Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak resign and face a probe committee, after a huge immigration-related racket came to the fore — Nepalis travelling on a visit visa have to routinely pay bribes to immigration officials at the international airport. The demand has become more intense after the head of immigration, whom Lekhak had hand-picked, was arrested. Oli knows that any action on corruption against senior leaders of the three major parties — UML, NC and Maoists — in general, and the first two in the ruling coalition in particular, could cause political disarray and hand a point to the monarchists. Despite the Maoists levelling allegations against Lekhak this time, the past has shown that parties often retreat in the face of corruption charges against their leaders. But the continued ruckus in Parliament may leave the government with two options — marshal the protesters out of the House or have the budget passed in disorder. More than the adoption of the budget, the current political trend — the growing intolerance and culture of violence — endangers Nepal's survival as a stable democracy. The writer is the Kathmandu-based contributing editor for The Indian Express
Indian Express
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
In Nepal, the crisis is about the system not just the government
About two decades ago, during the democracy movement, the US Ambassador to Nepal, James F Moriarty, said that King Gyanendra Shah might have to cling to a fleeing helicopter if he delayed handing over power to the political parties. The king, however, did not leave the country, even after he handed over power. Today, there are protests demanding his return as monarch. Perhaps taking a cue from the past, Rajendra Lingden, chief of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party and a major force in the ongoing movement for the restoration of constitutional monarchy within a democratic set-up, recently addressed the following comment to Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli: 'If they don't wish to compromise, we will at least give them the courtesy of leaving by helicopter.' No one from the global community, including the UN, has yet spoken in support of or opposition to the movement, which, according to its organisers, will enter its decisive phase from May 29. The movement to bring back Nepal's pre-2008 status as a Hindu kingdom is still in its early stages, but it has visibly unsettled the establishment, which keeps shifting depending on the coalition equations of the three dominant parties — the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist), the Nepali Congress, and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre). Currently, the first two have joined forces, while the Maoist Centre is in opposition. The regime is unpopular and perceived as corrupt. The silence of the international community, which in the past has been vocal in defending the supposed forces of democracy, has further angered supporters of a return to Nepal as a 'Hindu kingdom'. A letter on behalf of the movement to all missions and the UN explains that it will remain peaceful and that civil disobedience will be its chosen method. The leaders of the movement state that they oppose corruption and external interference in domestic politics, and support the preservation of Nepal's culture and identity — all while upholding the core values of the country's democracy. At the core of the movement is anger over the failure of the government to deliver political stability and economic prosperity while maintaining democratic principles. Visibly, the rule of law has become a casualty, and a political conglomerate controls constitutional bodies. On one hand, the top leadership enjoys immunity from corruption and major criminal offences; on the other, the regime has adopted a zero-tolerance approach towards dissenters, treating them as criminals. On Tuesday, Oli appointed Bishwa Poudel, a nominee of the Nepali Congress, as Governor of the Central Bank, following a warning by the party that it will withdraw from the coalition if the promise was not honoured. Oli saved the government from collapsing this time, but the growing rift between the two partners is apparent. Successive governments have chosen not to implement investigations by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP) against the Maoists, contrary to what was agreed in the Comprehensive Peace Accord of November 2006. What Nepal witnesses today is peace without justice. Two commissions in the past failed because the government chose not to define their rights and jurisdiction. A new commission formed last week has already been boycotted by 36 organisations representing victims of the conflict (1996–2006), due to a shortlist that lacks transparency, clear criteria, and a merit-based approach. Oli, despite the Maoists currently being in opposition, is seeking their support in case the current coalition collapses. After all, the government came into existence in July last year with the understanding that it would continue until December 2027, leaving the final 20 months for Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress to lead. But how long the present government will last has become inconsequential in light of the monarchy movement. The question is no longer how long the government will continue, but how long the current system can last — and whether it can prevent Nepal from descending into chaos. The writer is the Kathmandu-based contributing editor for The Indian Express
Hans India
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
Nepal: Leaders, experts call for 'bigger space' in enhancing ties with India
Kathmandu: Nepal's political party leaders, lawmakers, and experts have urged that the Himalayan nation must push for a bigger space in its relationship with India, especially following the April 22 Pahlagam terror attack. "We are so tempted that we should create a space in New Delhi out of the partnership that we have had till now, and particularly after the Pahalgam incident," said former minister and Nepali Congress leader, Minendra Rijal. Speaking at an event in Kathmandu on Monday organised by the Institute for Public Policy and Partnership, the former minister said since India's ties with some of their neighbours are facing some difficulties, Nepal has to seize the opportunity. He called for a sincere and open dialogue with India on sensitive issues. "No one can substitute Nepal-India relations. Since India is a big country, we definitely have complaints about it. Our relationship goes beyond the Roti-Beti cliche (sociocultural ties), and these relations don't fit in any single framework. But when engaging with India, most of the time, our leaders only cared about their politics and how to secure their election tickets," Rijal further said, urging for dialogue with India. Additionally, the former foreign minister of Nepal, NP Saud, addressing the event, said that in diplomacy, achieving completely balanced relationships is not possible despite what some people suggest. "We have to maintain our relations by keeping national interest at the core. We should be open while dealing with India. Non-alignment has become increasingly irrelevant, and multilateralism is becoming important to us. In this context, we need to fine-tune our relations with India due to the emerging global and regional context," said Saud. Meanwhile, Vijaya Jolly, former in-charge of the BJP's foreign cell, sought increased support from Nepal in India's fight against terrorism, adding that India does not mind if Nepal conducts its independent foreign policy with any country. He highlighted the long-standing neighbourly relations between both nations and stated that there is no space for terrorism in South Asia. "Saarc is dead, and terror and trade cannot go together. After 2025, we have to give new dimensions to our bilateral ties," said Jolly, condemning the terror attack. "It was India which responded first when an earthquake struck Nepal in 2015. Prime Minister Modi visited Nepal for a record five times since 2014, but at the same time, nine Nepali prime ministers have gone on official visits to India. Over 7.5 million Nepali nationals are living and working in India, which makes our relations special and unique. The security forces of both countries are guarding their respective borders," he further added. India and Nepal share a close and long-standing relationship, characterised by extensive cooperation in various areas, including defence, trade, development, and cultural exchange, according to the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). The MEA also mentioned that Nepal is a priority partner under India's "Neighbourhood First" policy. The frequent high-level visits and exchanges between the two nations have added momentum to the bilateral partnerships and helped the leadership to review at regular intervals the entire gamut of the relationship, the MEA mentioned.
India Gazette
08-05-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
Nepal's Maoist Center Deputy Secy general welcomes
Kathmandu [Nepal], May 8 (ANI): Nepal's opposition Maoist Center's Deputy Secretary General Janardan Sharma has welcomed India's Operation Sindoor against terrorism. Taking to Facebook on Thursday, Sharma, a former Foreign and Finance Minister welcomed the strike by India on terror hotbeds inside Pakistan. 'India has conducted 'Operation Sindoor' against terrorism. Terrorism is the worst thing that can happen to human civilization. It should be the duty of every nation to fight against terrorism. At the same time, it is necessary to defeat terrorism through mutual cooperation for peace and stability,' Sharma wrote on Facebook. On Thursday's meeting of the House of Representatives, Nepali lawmakers voiced support to the countries fighting against terrorism and demanded for clear stance of the government against terrorism following the Operation Sindoor of India. Nepali Congress lawmaker Ramhari Khatiwada, while addressing the parliamentary meeting on Thursday stated that any of the country has right to defend itself against terrorism. Giving reference of various wars, the lawmaker also demanded for governments preparedness in wake of the geopolitical crisis. 'The war between Russia and Ukraine, Israel and Hamas, current policy of the US President, China- Taiwan unification attempt and its after effects, India's attack on Pakistan for harboring terrorism has further made us vulnerable. I would request the government to be ready to face any of those consequences,' Khatiwada said. 'In the fight against the terrorism, we should support any of the countries,' the ruling party lawmaker stressed. Another Nepali Congress lawmaker, Mukta Kumari Yadav also demanded the government to clear the nations stand against terrorism. 'Nepal has adopted the foreign policy of non-alignment but the nation needs to clear up the stance against the terrorism,' Yadav said. Following the terror attack in Pahalgam of Jammu and Kashmir in India, the Indian Armed Forces on Wednesday launched 'Operation Sindoor', carrying out precision strikes on nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), days after the deadly terror attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 people. 'Our actions have been focused, measured and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution, said MoD. Further, as per the Ministry, these steps come in the wake of the 'barbaric' Pahalgam terrorist attack in which 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen were murdered. We are living up to the commitment that those responsible for this attack will be held accountable. (ANI)
New York Times
19-02-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Nepal Took a Risk on a $500 Million U.S. Grant. It May Now Regret It.
Nepal, the small Himalayan nation bordering China, was negotiating with Beijing over a major injection of infrastructure financing when the United States stepped in with a lucrative offer. Over five years, the American government would give the country $500 million in grants to expand its electricity grid and improve its roads — a huge sum in a country where the average annual income is about $1,400. The U.S. challenge to China's sway in its own region angered officials in Beijing. But Nepal, after five years of divisive debate, went ahead and accepted the offer, ratifying it in 2022 after coming up with $200 million of its own. Now, the project has been thrown into doubt with the Trump administration's freeze on foreign aid. Nepali leaders who had sided with the United States, backing the deal even as opponents called them U.S. puppets and traitors, are wondering if they made a terrible mistake in putting their faith in America. 'This is quite shocking,' said Rajendra Bajgain, a lawmaker from the governing Nepali Congress party, who had argued passionately for the U.S. project. 'They are making it easier for our neighboring countries, especially the Chinese, who are enjoying themselves. They will come to our office and say, 'See, this is how America acts.'' It is not clear if China has made any direct overtures to Nepal as the United States pulls back. But Beijing has been handed openings by President Trump's gutting of foreign aid and other moves that have alienated U.S. allies and partners. Some of them, like India, may find it harder to challenge China's growing assertiveness in Asia without the backing of the United States, particularly its financial muscle. The infrastructure grant to Nepal was made through the Millennium Challenge Corporation, an agency established by the U.S. Congress in 2004 during the George W. Bush administration. It has an annual budget of only about $1 billion, but it provides funding for programs around the world, including ones aimed at limiting the influence of China in Asia and Africa. The bulk of the Nepal grant was to be used to build a nearly 200-mile transmission line that would connect its power grid with India's, helping the country generate revenue by selling surplus electricity to its giant neighbor. The money would also help Nepal maintain about 200 miles of roads, helping to knit together a nation divided by its rough terrain. Some small, early contracts have been awarded, and work on parts of the project, including substations, has started. But on Tuesday, after remaining in the dark for weeks, Nepal announced that it had been told by the United States that funding for the program had been suspended for at least 90 days. The Millennium Challenge Corporation plans to apply to the State Department for waivers to keep eight large-scale programs, including the one in Nepal, on track, according to a U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The halt to U.S. grant money could impose serious hardships on recipient nations. If they are forced to break contracts, their already significant debt could grow. In the case of Nepal, it could incur a liability if it does not abide by its agreement with India to transmit electricity, the U.S. official said. Large hydropower projects in Nepal will also be affected if the transmission line is not completed, said Semanta Dahal, a lawyer who was part of the grant ratification process. Nepal had to overcome China's heavy influence to strike the agreement with the United States in 2017, during Mr. Trump's first administration. The mountain nation, with a long history of communist politics, has some affinities with China. The deal's detractors warned that it would mean a surrendering of sovereignty to the United States and stoked fears that American troops would someday arrive. China worked to amplify the doubts. 'Is it a gift or Pandora's box?' Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for China's Foreign Ministry, said as the debate was playing out in Nepal. 'I'm afraid it will turn out like a Nepalese saying: It looks good, but you will find the meat difficult to chew.' Supporters of the deal fought back, saying they would defend it 'in the Parliament and on the streets.' They pointed out that it was a grant from a democratic country and did not have strings that often come with Chinese loans, such as having to use Chinese contractors, which have overburdened some poorer borrowers. Nepal would soon experience this problem itself: It is on the hook for an international airport, at a significantly inflated price, without the necessary passenger numbers to repay the $200 million China lent to build it. That loan came around the same time that the Americans stepped in with their grant. 'It was risky, hard,' Gagan Thapa, a member of Parliament, said about the process of agreeing to the U.S. grant. 'There were several geopolitical complexities.' The two countries surmounted those challenges, Mr. Thapa said, 'based on Nepal-U.S. relations, and for the benefit of Nepalese people.' But as Mr. Trump turns America inward, that benefit may be fleeting.
