• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Nepal - Political Conditions

April traditionally is a month of political ferment in Nepal, primarily for meteorological, rather than ideological, reasons. Protests are almost a springtime ritual here, and the scent of spring flowers in the air is typically accompanied by the smell of burning tires, as the warmer, pre-monsoon weather draws various groups out into the streets to vent assorted grievances.

From the beginning of the most recent period of Nepali democracy in 1990, the development of governance was not effective. This is partially because although political democracy was won in large part by popular protest, it was still granted by the monarchy in 1990 in a fashion that imposed a democracy on a largely feudal and rural countryside. Nepali politicians, drawn from traditional elites, tended to see democracy as a means by which they would share power with the monarchy, rather than as a system in which they would represent the population and respond to its needs. Nepali politics thus has tended to operate as a competition for the spoils of power between different elite groups, who then reward their followers with patronage. Ordinary Nepalese tend to see politicians in traditional terms as leaders of patronage networks. While they look to politicians for results and benefits, they are just beginning to think of themselves as ‘citizens’ who should ultimately govern themselves.

The result of this pattern of politics is that political parties have constantly competed, split, and stalemated the government as individual politicians sought to gain advantage. Politicians have focused on the struggle for power in Kathmandu and have paid little attention to conditions or demands from the countryside. The parties thus command loyalty mainly through patronage, rather than established national organizations.

In the early 1990s, both the King and the parliamentary government (chosen under free and fair but not inclusive elections) were viewed as legitimate by the elites and most of the urban population. The rural population however, while still supporting the King, was largely neglected by the elected politicians and as grinding poverty persisted without any significant interventions by the government, hopes diminished that democracy would bring improvements in ordinary Nepali’s lives. In the course of the 1990s, as parliaments changed almost annually and the corruption of the competing patronage networks that ran the major parties became evident, the parliamentary government lost much popular support.

The principle driver in Nepali politics since 2000 has been the social and political assertion of long-marginalized communities. The assessment points out that these newly emerged formerly excluded social actors are claiming their rightful place in the public sphere without willingness to moderate their demands for the sake of “maintaining social harmony” and that the new trends have especially crystallized around demands for single ethnicity-based federalism.

Every government formed since 2006 has allocated Key Ministerial Posts to Madhesi Political leaders -- a clear indication of the power of the Madhesis as a clearly defined ethnic group. Other Marginalized groups such as Dalits and Kamaya’s are also organized to fight for inclusion but because of a long history of marginalization, oppression and forced labor and the lack of formal education, these groups continue to fall behind. In the first CA, Dalits had an unprecedented number of seats. However, their eight percent share was still considerably lower than their population ratio of 13 percent.

Criminal violence, sometimes conducted under the guise of political activism, remains a problem, though a declining one. Bandhs (general strikes) called by political parties and other agitating groups sometimes halt transport and shut down businesses, sometimes nationwide. Americans and other Westerners are generally not targets of violence. Business owners, especially those in the Terai, the southern plains bordering India, have been the target of extortion and kidnapping by political party activists and criminal groups aligned with them. To extort ransom, armed groups have targeted business entrepreneurs and local government employees, but generally not foreigners. Most of these criminal acts took place in the Central and Eastern Terai regions, and have decreased significantly in recent years.

A number of violent incidents, including bomb attacks, occurred at crowded locations and on public transport throughout the country. Illegal roadblocks and enforced national or local bandhs (strikes) can occur without notice and continue for lengthy periods. At these times, businesses close and vehicles are not allowed on the roads. Access to the airport can be disrupted and taxis are not usually available. Even when possible, travel (including by taxi) can be dangerous.

Various political groups may also call bandhs (general strikes) that force the closure of all businesses and disrupt vehicular traffic. Some groups enforce observance of bandhs through violence and intimidation. The last significant, multi-day nationwide bandh occurred in the run-up to the November 2013 elections, organized by a coalition of small parties headed by a splinter Maoist party. The week-long bandh – billed as a “transportation strike” – saw some initial success in disrupting schools, businesses, and traffic but lost momentum after a few days. Unlike many previous bandhs, the government took vigorous action in November 2013 to arrest individuals responsible for bandh-related violence.

Since political reform began in 1990, some progress has been achieved in the transition to a more open society with greater respect for human rights; however, substantial problems remain. Poorly trained police sometimes use excessive force in quelling demonstrations. In addition, there have been reports of torture during detention and widespread reports of custodial abuse. In 2000, the government established the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a government-appointed commission with a mandate to investigate human rights violations. However, the government continues to stall in implementing the commission's recommendations and has not been able to enforce accountability for recent and past abuses.

By 2004 Nepal's young democracy had experienced some painful and severe delays in its development. The nation had as many democratic prime ministers (14) as actual years of democracy -- a reflection of the constant in-fighting, persistent jockeying for advantage, and deep-rooted aversion to cooperation and compromise that most observers consider characteristic of the political leadership. The popular perception is that democracy -- at least as it is practiced in Nepal -- has failed to satisfy popular expectations of improved living standards, more evenly distributed socio-economic development, and a more equitable and efficient administration of justice. While these expectations may be unrealistic--Nepalis tend to compare their democracy with the US and France, rather than more appropriate regional examples like Sri Lanka or Bangladesh -- the pervasive sense of disillusionment nonetheless is quite real.

The King's February 2005 dismissal of the government, subsequent imposition of emergency rule and suspension of many civil rights--including freedom of expression, assembly, and privacy--was a setback for human rights in Nepal. During this 3-month period, censors were deployed to major newspapers, and many political leaders were kept under house arrest. The King's government restricted the media from publishing interviews, articles, or news items against the spirit of the royal proclamation of February 1, 2005 or in support of terrorist or destructive activities. The reinstated government, led by Prime Minister Koirala, reversed these decisions in May 2006. The interim constitution promulgated on January 15, 2007 ensured unrestricted freedom of expression and made the NHRC a constitutional body.

Both the Maoists and security personnel have committed numerous human rights violations. The Maoists used tactics such as kidnapping, torture, bombings, intimidation, killings, and conscription of children. Within the Nepalese security forces, violations ranged from disappearances to executions. After the royal takeover on February 1, 2005 and subsequent imposition of the state of emergency, the security forces arrested many political leaders, student leaders, journalists, and human rights activists under the Public Security Act of 1989, although all were released by June 2005 when the King ended the state of emergency.

After the April 2006 cease-fire announced by the government and the Maoists, incidents of human rights violations by the government declined substantially while incidents of human rights violations by the Maoists continued relatively unabated. Even after signing a comprehensive peace agreement with the government in November 2006, Maoists' extortion, abduction, and intimidation remained largely unchecked. Although activities by other political parties have increased significantly in the rural parts of Nepal, political party representatives, police, non-governmental organization (NGO) workers, and journalists reported continuous threats and intimidation by Maoist-affiliated Young Communist League (YCL), Maoist-affiliated All Nepal National Free Students Union (ANNFSU), UML-affiliated Youth Force (YF), UML-affiliated Youth Action Nepal (YAN), or Nepali Congress-affiliated Tarun Dal cadres. During the January-February 2007 uprising in the Tarai, reports of government security forces using excessive force to quell demonstrations were common.

Major daily English-language newspapers include "The Kathmandu Post," "The Himalayan Times," "Republica," and "The Rising Nepal." The last and its vernacular sister publication are owned by a government corporation. There are hundreds of smaller daily and weekly periodicals that are privately owned and of varying journalistic quality. Views expressed since the 1990 move to democracy are varied and vigorous. There are 394 (334 in use) FM radio and 32 (19 in use) television licenses for privately owned and operated stations, following liberalization of licensing regulations. Radio Nepal and Nepal Television are government-owned and operated. There are over 700 cable television operators nationwide, and satellite dishes to receive television broadcasts abound. Internet penetration in Nepal is approximately 4% of the population. Despite its prominence, the Nepali press is still frequently subject to violence and intimidation by political groups.

Trafficking in women and child labor remain serious problems, but some improvement has been seen; in addition, the founder of a U.S.-backed anti-trafficking organization, Maiti Nepal, won the 2010 CNN Hero award. According to the State Department's 2011 Trafficking in Persons Report, Nepal is mainly a source country for men, women, and children who are subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. While Nepal is primarily a source country for destinations like India and the Middle East, internal trafficking is also a prominent issue. Lack of prosecution and police complicity in trafficking cases remain major problems. Discrimination against women and lower castes is prevalent.

Poor governance, corruption, incompetence and self-absorption clearly cost the political leadership much popular support.