‘Except for a small, corrupt clique close to the palace, most Nepalese don’t need a king even emotionally’

Both..historic, important and a new ideological experiment for peace and prosperity in Nepal, but one that is bound to have a long-term impact in South Asia too.

• But for the families of the more than 13,000 people who were killed during the insurgency, any compromise must be a bitter pill to swallow.

No, their sacrifice was not in vain. Our people have been fighting for a constituent assembly and the right to decide their own destiny for 60 years — this is a victory for that struggle. We are going to restructure the whole state in a democratic way. We are going to end the centralised and autocratic monarchy, under which we lived for more than 230 years. So, looking at the overall political scenario, this is a great victory.

• But you are still not a free man. What are you hiding from?

We cannot trust Gyanendra. We have to remain alert. When the monarchy is abolished completely, and not halfway as is the case right now, then we will be able to move around freely.

• To what extent did 9/11 and the international war against terror motivate you to forge peace?

This is a very strategically sensitive question. The so-called war on terror and 9/11, initiated by the US, had a very negative implication on civil wars. The US tried to support our autocratic monarchy, they tried to organise a big defensive initiative for the Royal Nepal Army (RNA), and that created some technical difficulties for us. We were well on our way to victory when the war on terror began. It had a big repercussion and we were forced to take new political initiatives. So most of the things we began, like the 12-point understanding, were either directly or indirectly influenced by the war against terror.

• And how do you intend to deal with the United States now? To them, you and your Maoists are terrorists..

It is up to the US. We have neither requested, nor pleaded with the them to take us off that list. At the time of the 12-point understanding, the US had consistently tried to sabotage the peace process and the historical mass movement. Even after this week’s peace agreement, their attitude has not changed. They obviously want some sort of an equation with the monarch. We want an interaction, but the US leadership must change its attitude, which is far more traditional, dogmatic and sectarian about the experiment we are conducting here in Nepal than even that of a totalitarian country.

• But your own agreement with the 7-party coalition is far from perfect. Regarding the future of the monarchy, you want to get rid of the king altogether, others need the figurehead of a king as a ceremonial head of state.

Except perhaps for a small, rich and corrupt clique close to the palace, I don’t think the majority of Nepalese need a king even emotionally. Our people have no sympathies for the palace at all. Under former king Birendra, perhaps it was different. You know, we were in close contact with him, and our discussions were not about preserving monarchy but on how to abolish it gradually. So there was a sort of understanding with Birendra. Unfortunately, that debate is now over. After the family were brutally massacred, we Nepalese have a serious problem, with his successor Gyanendra and his son Paras.

• There is another bloody civil war raging in South Asia — that of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka. What could the Tigers and Colombo learn from your peace agreement?

The main differences between the LTTE and us are ideological and political. We are fighting for all those who are oppressed and for society as a whole. The LTTE are fighting for one particular group and their fight is narrow and nationalistic with no scientific ideology behind it. Somewhere down the line, they will have to compromise, otherwise they will be defeated.

• One of your biggest proclaimed enemies has always been India. And yet during your recent visit to Delhi, you were the apple of everyone’s eye, especially that of the communists in the ruling coalition. How do you explain the sudden change in your relationship to India, to the cadres you had indoctrinated against India yourself?

In the same way as events are unfolding — gradually. Earlier, India’s ruling classes and government themselves were different towards us. Today, their own attitude has changed perceptibly. India helped shape the 12-point understanding. We have also noted India’s concern that the Nepal peace process is not delayed any further. Earlier, they believed in the two-pillar theory in Nepal — the monarchy and the government. Today, even that has changed. Accordingly, I have been telling my cadres and our masses that we, too, must change our attitude towards India. And they are beginning to understand that.

• You are allegedly close to China, but also to Pakistan’s ISI — indeed, you are said to have helped the ISI in many an act of terror against your — at least then mutual — ‘enemy’, India.

When I was in Delhi, I spoke about both and my remarks seem to have created some controversy. Let me say this loudly and clearly: we never had any special relations with China. We did speak to some Chinese intellectuals in recent months but otherwise there has been no interaction. As far as the ISI is concerned, we were never interested in forging such close relations with it, nor were there ever any. Even when the odd ISI person approached us, we would spurn all contact. We wanted to maintain neutrality. We want good relations with both our big neighbours but also between them.

• So you are confident that the ‘Big Brother’ attitude that you have accused India of in the past is set to change now.

By supporting democracy here, India has shown a positive attitude. Our effort will be to launch a new era of friendship and cooperation.

• One day after you signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the UN reported that your cadres in some remote areas are still recruiting children by force.

This is simply untrue. Sometimes we have to employ the children of our cadres who were killed in the war and that leads to such rumours. In cases in remote areas where we found this to be true, we immediately sent the children back to their families. In any case, please don’t forget we manage the education for all the children of our cadres.

• But the UN doesn’t seem convinced. You are currently discussing the modalities of placing your weapons under UN surveillance. Is the issue of child recruitments proving a hindrance to your relations with the UN in any way?

Not at all. We have promised the UN that if such cases do come to light, we will take immediate action.

• What is the biggest challenge ahead of you?

The elections to the constituent assembly. And we have to face these in a united way. That is our main concern. Because regressive forces close to the feudal monarchy do not want this election, because the majority will favour a republican state. So these forces are trying to create a rift between the seven-member coalition and us.

• Can you see yourself as the future president of a republic of Nepal one day?

I have no interest in such a post. But if the masses want to give me the responsibility and if my party chooses me as the best candidate then I will have to take it. I want to change society in a progressive way, that’s all. High posts don’t matter so much to me.

• What has been the greatest gain for you and the Maoists through the peace process?

That we finally have the chance to decide our own destiny for the first time. The peace process is our victory and that of the country, and that has been our greatest gain.

Padma Rao Sundarji is Chief of South Asia Bureau, Der Spiegel