Occasional Paper: Peace Building Series No.1 FutureGenerations Applied Community Graduate School Change and Conservation PeoPle’s ParticiPation in conflict transformation: a case study of Jana andolan II in nePal Bandita Sijapati Social Science Baha February 2009 Occasional Papers of the Future Generations Graduate School explore community-based approaches to social development, health, nature conservation, peace building, and governance. Faculty, alumni, and partner organizations present their field studies and applied research. www.future.edu People’s Participation in Conflict Transformation: A Case Study of Jana Andolan II in Nepal Rise from every village, rise from every settlement To change the face of this country, rise Those who have a pen in hand, bring your pen and rise Those who can play an instrument, bring your instrument and rise Those who have a tool in hand, bring your tool and rise Those who have nothing at all, bring your voice and rise.1 I. INTRODUCTION In April 2006, there was a country-wide people’s movement in Nepal, popularly known as the Jana Andolan II,2 against King Gyanendra’s direct rule3 following a 12-point understanding reached between the Seven Party Alliance4 and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), which was leading a communist insurgency against the state. The 19-day-long Jana Andolan II5 (People’s Movement II) ended direct rule by Gyanendra, forced him to return power to the reinstated parliament, and created a conducive environment for the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the government and the rebel Maoists in November 2006. The success of Jana Andolan II in thus ending the decade-long conflict that had affected all parts of the country has thus been hailed by many as being exemplary of the ways in which engaged citizenry and communities at the local level can have an impact on the resolution and transformation of violent conflict at the national level. By using literature on social movements, peace building and conflict transformation, this paper seeks to provide an understanding of how communities and citizen groups at multiple levels (local, regional and national) were mobilized across class, caste, ethnic and religious divides to effectively topple the royal regime and help bring an end to 10 years of violence. More specifically, the paper shows how Jana Andolan II was able 1 Translation of well-known Nepali “progressive” song, “Gau, Gau bata utha,” played by radio stations throughout the country during the April 2006 Jana Andolan II. 2 Jana Andolan I being the people’s movement against the three-decade-long Panchayat regime led by the king. 3 King Gyanendra had dismissed the civilian government on February 1, 2005, enforced what in effect was martial law after declaring a national emergency, curtailed all human, civic and political rights, and formed a government led by himself. 4 The Seven Party Alliance (SPA) comprised of the Nepali Congress, the mainstream Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) and a number of other smaller parties, mainly leftist, including People’s Front Nepal (PFN), Nepal Workers and Peasants Party (NWPP), Nepal Sadbhawana Party- (NSP-A) and United Left Front (ULF) led by CP Mainali. 5 Jana Andolan I being the popular movement against the present king’s brother’s absolute rule in 1990. People’s Participation in Conflict Transformation: A Case Study of Jana Andolan II in Nepal to influence the political structure of the Nepali state, its policies, its party mechanisms, as well as its dominant culture and how, in turn, the movement and its goals, were shaped by these forces. It will be argued that it was the interplay between the movement initiated by political parties but then advanced by civil society, internal forces such as the structure of the state and the institution of the monarchy, and the mechanism of political parties along with their relationship with each other and external influences that made the signing of the peace agreement possible. The study is based on research conducted at two levels: (i) a desk study that included a literature review of Nepal-specific issues such as the Maoist conflict; the role of the monarchy; social, political and economic issues; popular protests and movements from the past; and role of civil society. In addition, media research (Nepali and English) was also conducted on political developments prior to, during and after Jana Andolan II with a focus on events from October 2002, when King Gyanendra dismissed the democratically elected government, up to March 2007 when the Madhesh Andolan—the regional agitation in the southern Tarai plain ended; and (ii) a micro-level in-depth study conducted in Chitwan district to study local-level dynamics that were at play in the period around Jana Andolan II. The selection of Chitwan district as a research site is based on the fact that during Jana Andolan II, Chitwan was in the forefront in many ways—high levels of women’s participation, the coming together of various issue-based community organizations, strong rural and urban linkages, and a vibrant local press, which covered the movement extensively. The micro-level study included 60 in-depth interviews with individuals who participated in Jana Andolan II in Chitwan in various capacities. Furthermore, 10 key-informant interviews was also conducted in Kathmandu with prominent personalities from civil society, government and political parties to get a national perspective on people’s participation and the impact of Jana Andolan II. The paper is divided into three main sections. The first discusses the nature and the course of the conflict, which led the way to the royal takeover and subsequently the movement for the restoration of democracy and sustainable peace. The second discusses the nature of Jana Andolan II in terms of key actors, groups and communities involved in the movement; the individual as well as collective incentives for participation; the ways in which partnerships were forged among communities, governments and external actors; and the contextual factors that influenced as well as created the environment for popular participation. The third section focuses on the impact of Jana Andolan II in terms of how it was able to bring an end to the royal regime and pave the way for the signing of the peace agreement. 1 People’s Participation in Conflict Transformation: A Case Study of Jana Andolan II in Nepal II. DESCRIPTION, NATURE AND COURSE OF THE MAOIST CONFLICT The Maoist insurgency began on 13 February 1996 when the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), hereafter CPN (M), launched its Jana Yudhha, or People’s War, after presenting a 40-point charter of demands to the then Nepali Congress-led government. Initially, the government dismissed the issue as a law-and-order problem, but the Maoists were soon able to demonstrate their strength in May 1997 when they boycotted the local elections, which prevented polls from being conducted in 87 village development committees. After the success of the 1997 boycott, the Maoists gradually embarked on taking control of government functions. The state responded in May 1998 by launching the infamous ‘Kilo Sierra Two’, a ‘search and kill’ operation, in all the Maoist-affected areas resulting in the deaths of 500 people, including Maoist rebels, their supporters and innocent civilians. Instead of quelling the movement, police brutality during the operation fuelled the insurgency even further. In fact, in an early 2001 nation-wide opinion poll, 30 percent of the respondents indicated that police violence was responsible for the increase in Maoist activity.6 In 1999, the government formed a “High-Level Committee to Provide Suggestions to Solve the Maoist Problem”, which, instead of addressing the root causes of the problem, attributed the conflict to “weaknesses in the management and administration of the state as well as to the frequent changes in government.” It further added that, “rather than a growth in the people’s support for the Maoists it [was] the inability of the state machinery to assert itself forcefully.”7 Amidst attacks and counter-attacks between the police and the Maoists, in early 2001 the latter announced that their guiding principle would henceforth be ‘Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and Prachanda Path’. The principle behind Prachanda Path was essentially to move towards building a “central people’s government” while reiterating the importance of further consolidating the united fronts “in order to play the role of people’s power at the central level with a view to consolidate and expand local people’s power and base areas.”8 The propagation of 6 Deepak Thapa with Bandita Sijapati. A Kingdom Under Seige: Nepal’s Maoist Insurgency 1996-2004, Zed Books, London, 2005. 7 Ibid., p. 73 8 The “United People’s Front,” later called “Revolutionary United Front” were created during the course of the people’s war to mobilize broad-based mass support among workers, peasants, and people of different castes and ethnic groups. To name a few, these included: ethnic fronts such as the Tharuwan Liberation Front, the Limbuwan National Liberation Front, Nepal Dalit Liberation Front; region-based fronts like the Karnali Regional Liberation Front, Madheshi National Liberation Front; and class based organizations like All Nepal National Free Students’ Union (Revolutionary), All Nepal Women’s Organization 3 People’s Participation in Conflict Transformation: A Case Study of Jana Andolan II in Nepal Prachanda Path was a clear indication that the Maoists were ready to extend their activities to the capital, Kathmandu, which until then had not experienced any major rebel activities. In June 2001, after the royal massacre in which King Birendra and his family were killed, his brother, Gyanendra, ascended the throne. In October 2002, the king dismissed the government led by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress and began a process of nominating successive governments.