KATHMANDU: The visiting United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs B Lynn Pascoe who spoke at Nepal Institute for Policy Studies (NIPS) has expressed disappointment at the pace of the peace process that has tended to fray in what is shared by the international community. 

"Beyond the disappointment lies a sense of deep concern for the future, a fear that Nepal’s opportunity for a durable and transformative peace could slip away unless actions are taken urgently to restore the momentum," Pascoe said.

He also referred to the recently completed discharge of minors and late recruits from the Maoist cantonments was an important advance and that the establishment of a high-level political mechanism to foster greater focus on the peace process responded to a long felt need for such a forum to be created.  

Yet the central issues on the peace agenda remain as yet unresolved, and the challenge for Nepal – and the purpose of my visit this week – is to examine the situation together in order to see how to move forward from here, he said. 

I have already begun an intensive round of discussions with senior Nepali leaders from government and across the political spectrum. Later today, I will be visiting one of the Maoist cantonment sites where UNMIN arms monitors are stationed.

When I return to New York, I will brief the UN Security Council on the state of the peace process in Nepal. Based on a request from the parties, the Council provides the mandate under which the United Nations Mission in Nepal has worked since 2007 in support of the peace process. 

He also stressed the view that integration and rehabilitation of the Maoist army personnel should go  parallel to the commitments on the democratization of the Nepal army

He remindd just over three years since the end of the conflict, Nepal remains suspended at a delicate point along a nation’s journey from war to peace. Research and painful experience have shown that more than half of the time, countries emerging from protracted civil wars slide back into conflict within the first decade.

"While I am in no way suggesting Nepal is heading down the road of resurgent conflict, I do wish to underscore the vital importance of this issue. The effective integration and rehabilitation of former combatants is one of the most important factors distinguishing those countries that successfully navigate these transitions to peace," he said.

Former combatants need to be afforded a real stake in the economic, political and institutional life of the country. Inclusion of some in the security forces is a critical security guarantee and confidence-building measure. Moreover, it is in the interest of the state and all of its people to transform and shape a post-conflict security force that is apolitical, committed to human rights and firmly under democratic oversight. These are basic tenets of a successful peace compact. 

Unfortunately, Nepal today still has two armies, and no agreed strategy for what to do about this.  Thousands of former Maoists combatants remain in camps that were intended to last only a few months, under UNMIN monitoring that has also gone on much longer than anticipated. It stands as a great accomplishment that the cease-fire has held, with few incidents. Nepal is fortunate and can take credit for the fact that the problems have not been more pronounced.

There is lively political discussion on which must come first - Maoist army integration or the drafting of the constitution - but there is no agreed action plan, and no consensus yet on the modalities or the numbers to be integrated into the security forces.

The recent establishment of a task force headed by the Minister of Defense to look at the commitments related to the democratization and rightsizing of the Nepal Army was a useful sign of movement forward on that critical issue.   

The question of the future of the two armies should not remain unresolved any longer. We encourage leaders to engage in serious, good-faith discussions leading to agreements and actions.  

Definitive progress in integration and rehabilitation would translate immediately into increased confidence in the peace process and should also help to unlock obstacles in the political arena.  Progress would also go a long way toward creating the conditions for UNMIN to wind down and complete its mandated tasks.

Second, the drafting of the new Constitution

The second major challenge is the drafting of the new Constitution.

The Nepali people did their part on April 10^th 2008. They elected a diverse Constituent Assembly invested with the mandate to transform the state in a more inclusive, democratic and participatory direction – to build a “new Nepal”.

The tasks at hand would be extremely challenging in any society. They involve contentious issues such as the federal structure, the form of governance, and the inclusion of historically marginalized groups. Much work has been done to date in the thematic committees of the Constituent Assembly, but difficult questions remain ahead. The May 28 deadline is fast approaching for the completion of the Constitution.

We strongly encourage that every effort be made to accelerate progress in the days and weeks ahead.   At the same time, inclusive discussions are needed to prepare carefully for the possibility that a final draft of the constitution will not be completed by the deadline. The way forward, in that event, should be determined through dialogue and consensus. 

As part of this process, it will be critical to engage traditionally marginalized groups for whom the new constitution carries the promise of greater recognition and representation.

Restoring Trust, Moving Forward

Restoring Nepal to the path and to the promise of its peace agreements is possible if there is political will to move forward.

On one level, it means making steady progress on each of the outstanding commitments of the agreements I have just mentioned. On a deeper level, it is about reviving the spirit of consensus-based politics that drove the peace process during its earlier stages. It means finding a way to remain focused on longer-term vision of the peace process and not sidetracked by short-term political maneuvering.

The establishment of the high level political mechanism was an important step in that direction. It provides the parties with a useful arena for refocusing on the pending agenda of the peace process.  We encourage them to make more effective use of this forum. 

Restoring trust also requires positive actions to demonstrate sincerity about each party’s commitment to peace and the democratic process. Violence by youth groups must be brought under control.

The fundamental understanding of the peace process should guide the actions of all involved, namely the  commitment to competitive multiparty democracy, civil liberties and human rights on the one hand, and to Nepal’s political, economic and social transformation on the other.

Both the Nepal Army and the Maoist army can help to restore trust by demonstrating a stronger commitment to human rights, particularly by cooperating with investigations into alleged violations committed by their personnel both during and after the conflict.

The role of the United Nations

The United Nations has been privileged to be a part of the peace process in Nepal. I would like to say a few words in this regard about the role of UNMIN in this effort.

In recent decades, the United Nations has deployed political and peacekeeping mission to dozens of countries who have asked for assistance in working through difficult transitions from war to peace. There are 16 peacekeeping missions in the field today, along with 11 field-based political missions, of which UNMIN is one.

No country is more familiar with this flagship activity of the United Nations than Nepal; you can take great pride in your remarkable contributions to UN peacekeeping.

In contrast to almost every other current missions, UNMIN has a notably limited mandate, concentrated essentially in two areas (of which one has been completed): assisting in the holding of the Constituent Assembly election, and arms monitoring.

As per our mandate we have a small mission concentrating on arms monitors. There is a senior representative of the Secretary-General on the ground, but with only a tacit “good offices” role of fostering consensus and reconciliation, in contrast to the explicit political mandates common in UN missions elsewhere in the world.

Even within its arms monitoring function, UNMIN, contrary to popular misconception, has been given no mandate or capacity to police the cantonments. Its access to information about the status of the two armies or their numbers depends entirely on their voluntary cooperation.

And, as both parties well know, the information UNMIN holds as a result of the registration process in the cantonments is subject to confidentiality agreements that were accepted by both sides in the peace process. Honoring that commitment is essential to our impartiality. Honoring one’s commitments is the essence of being an honest, reliable actor in the peace process.

This light UN footprint was designed at Nepal’s request and insistence, and the United Nations has scrupulously respected these limitations - even when we have felt we have more to offer to Nepal, based on UN experience in dozens of conflicts around the world.  

In the face of this situation, we are dismayed that some commentators try to hold the mission responsible for situations and shortcomings that by the very insistence of the parties themselves, the mission has little or no capacity to control. This is absurd and should come to an end.

UNMIN is here to help. It should not take the blame for those who fail to shoulder their responsibilities to make the peace process work.