Home >> History, Ideology & Science >> Political Theory

     Email   Print 

Terror and Peace

Ajay Nath - 9/11/2007

The American President's recent statement on terrorism was the strongest so far against the enemies of freedom and human civilization. He just does not believe in any form of compromise. Terrorists are terrorists and they must be dealt with severely, wherever they are, whoever they are. Their atrocities and barbaric display of Pol Pot-like behaviour are beyond human imagination and tolerance. The British Prime Minister has come down equally heavily on terrorists. The British government is, in fact, coming out with a special law on terrorism that empowers it even to expel suspected terrorists from Britain and curtail the freedom of expression when it comes to promotion of terrorist activity, as well as limitations on movement and other rights to control and curb terrorism - a common threat that is disturbing global peace, stability and people's desires for prosperity.

Under the undaunted and unflinching American leadership, the struggle against the enemies of freedom and civilization is gaining an unprecedented momentum, be it in Britain or Brussels, Nepal or New York, Madrid or Madras. Terrorism is a menace to innocent people and public property. No human being should have any kind of mercy or tolerance towards the terrorists as long as they do not renounce violence, give up arms, surrender to the state and promise to come to the national political fold and reconcile with the national mainstream. Unless the state security forces are strongly beefed up, the terrorists won't give up their violent activities and atrocities. As long as they are able to unleash terror, people can neither exercise their fundamental rights nor take any responsibility. To enforce the rule of law, the security agencies have to be effective; for that, the whole instrument of national power has to be marshaled behind the legitimate operations of the security forces.

Because it is a war of ideas, the political institutions should be harnessed effectively to fight a political and ideological battle so that people are geared up to face challenges and defeat the terrorists. The will of the majority is mandatory for the pluralistic institutions to function; this calls for a functioning democracy. Political institutions, therefore, have a decisive role to play in defeating terrorism; the security forces can only stabilize the situation to provide space for the political agencies to maneuver enough to strike a suitable deal.

In Nepal, terrorists have been operating for the last ten years, and their fundamental strategy has been to unleash terror and extort the people. Those who do not obey their diktats are punished fatally in front of families, friends and neighbours. Thus far, they have killed 15 thousand people, maimed and displaced more than a hundred thousand, and destroyed public and private property worth billions of rupees. Recently, they blew up a public bus in Chitwan district killing 38 people, and massacred 6 children and women in Kailali. They have forced industries like Colgate, Uniliver to close down and destroyed Jyoti Spinning Mills depriving thousands of workers of their jobs and meals.

The Industrial Security Group (ISG), which consists of the representatives of the embassies of France, Germany, India, the United Kingdom, the United States and the delegation of the European Commission, along with their bilateral Chambers of Commerce, has strongly condemned the terrorists' destruction and damage of public property. The ISG has said that the Maoists' claim to represent workers' interests is a pretext for extortion and an illegitimate means to achieve political ends. Closures of companies and joint ventures would hurt the basic interests of the people and no political force should legitimize or recognize such acts of terrorism. The Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, too, has strongly condemned such acts. Surprisingly, the political parties have been rather reluctant to condemn these acts of terrorism against the state and the people.

Recently, some political leaders have expressed support to the Maoists' agendas of the People's Republic and Constituent Assembly. What does this mean? How wise would a leader be to endorse the ideas of Constituent Assembly and republicanism? What does republic mean for a country like Nepal, with its unique geopolitical situation, geo-strategic importance and diverse natural characteristics? Just think of Nepal without the institution of monarchy! Who would be able to control the chaos and confusion that are inevitable if Nepal ever became a republic? Would Nepal, without monarchy, be able to absorb the triangular shock of internal feuds, neighbours' hegemony and conflicting international interests?

While the Maoists are brutalizing the people and the political parties are agitating for a Constituent Assembly and People's Republic in the secure, peaceful capital, the King is sweating in the remote, Maoist-affected areas of the country, listening and talking to the suffering people. He is offering political space for the Maoists; he has also extended an olive branch to the political parties, calling them for national unity in order to address the country's key problems. Peace - a permanent one - is his priority, re-energizing democratic institutions his project.

If peace and development are Nepal's priority and stability and prosperity are its projects, which the King has been stressing all along, what prevents the political parties from joining hands with him? Instead of instigating and encouraging their small but radical groups of students, cadres and followers to destroy public property and create hindrances to the normal flow of common lives in the major public centers and educational institutions, the political parties can exert pressure on the Maoists to give up violence, lay down arms and accept the people's impartial verdict. If the political parties allow themselves to be used and exploited by the terrorists, as in the past, democracy, human rights and press freedom will be the first victims of the terrorists' violence. Nobody should forget how the Bolsheviks and Joseph Stalin wiped out their democratic opponents.