Tag Archives: ian martin

American Diplomatic Cable: A Silent Indian in a Multinational Meeting on Nepal

Posted on September 9, 2011 by | 1 Comment

2007-02-09 12:45

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 000341

SIPDIS
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/09/2017
TAGS: PREL PGOY PTER UN NP
SUBJECT: U.S., UK, INDIA, AND UN DISCUSS CHALLENGES CONFRONTING THE POLICE

REF: KATHMANDU 03268

Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty. Reasons 1.4 (b/d).

SUMMARY
——-

¶1. (C) In a February 6 meeting with the Ambassador, UK
Ambassador Hall, UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) head Ian Martin,
and an Indian Embassy representative, a visiting UK security
assessment team described the key challenges facing the
police as: 1) the absence of public debate on public security
and police reform; 2) lack of leadership within the Police
and Home Ministry to catalyze needed reform efforts; 3)
abysmally low morale among the police force; 4) misguided
planning for security ahead of planned June 2007 elections;
and 5) lack of police preparedness to address key security
challenges. The UK team recommended the gathered Missions
press for a scenario-based discussion to encourage Home
Ministry and Police leadership to plan ahead for election
security and issue necessary directives. The UK team also
highlighted the need to balance short-term election security
efforts with longer-term reform, and discussed how to
influence the development of the forthcoming Police Act,
promote a national-level committee on public safety/security
to encourage public debate and explore expansion of community
policing. Continue reading →

→ 1 Comment

Posted in American Diplomatic Cable

Tagged , , , , ,

Ian Martin asks: Is Peace Process in Nepal Failing?

Posted on November 10, 2009 by | 5 Comments

Ian MartinFIVE Fundamentals of Nepali Peace Process, according to Ian Martin:

The first fundamental is the commitment to power-sharing and consensus. The second fundamental is the commitment of the Maoists to the transformation of their movement, to conform to democratic multi-party norms and to respect the rule of law. The third, the commitment to transformation in the security sector: to the “integration and rehabilitation” of former Maoist combatants, and to an action plan for “democratisation” of the Nepali Army. The fourth, the commitment to political, economic and social transformation, where the Comprehensive Peace Agreement set out a radical and ambitious agenda. The fifth and last fundamental is the commitment to address the needs of victims of the conflict, and to build the rule of law by ending impunity.

By Ian Martin
[Martin is former Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Nepal for the United Nations Mission in Nepal]

In recent days there have been calls for the revision of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, accusations and counter-accusations that it is being broken by Maoist agitation or threats of mobilisation of the Army, and calling into question even of the 12-point Understanding which was the very foundation of the peace process. It is thus timely to ask whether the peace process is failing; if so, why; and what is required to save it.

I no longer speak for the UN on Nepal, and I want to make very clear that I am speaking only for myself. I do so solely as a friend of Nepal, and as someone who deeply wants to see Nepal go forward in peace, respect for human rights, and socio-economic progress for all its diverse peoples.

I want to try to address what I regard as the larger underlying issues of the peace process in Nepal, which I believe is the way to address the question of what needs to be done to get it back on track.

Five aspects of the peace agreements have been unchanging and are fundamental, and it is the extent to which they have been respected or not respected which I want to examine this evening. Continue reading →

→ 5 Comments

Posted in Peace Process 2

Tagged , , , , ,

Ian Martin Q and A

Posted on October 10, 2007 by | 14 Comments

Ian Martin, Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Nepal, talks to journalists in a press conference in Kathmandu today. Transcript by United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN)

Shirish Ballav Pradhan, Press Trust of India: Who do you blame for the postponement of the Constituent Assembly election? Do you think that the election would now be held within the end of the Nepali calendar of 2064 (mid-April 2008)?

Ian Martin: It’s not for the UN to blame anyone and indeed I hope that others, the political parties, will concentrate not so much on deciding who is to blame as on deciding what is to be done now, and as I said sustaining their alliance in order to go forward. Again, as I was implying, the prospects for holding a credible Constituent Assembly election at any particular date is not just the matter of fixing the date, it’s a matter of agreeing upon the steps that are necessary to make it possible. We said some of that when the June election was postponed, and unfortunately there wasn’t then a clear road-map towards November 22, though there were good technical preparations. This is a moment when the parties need to focus not just on the date but, as I have tried indicate, some of the key steps that are necessary for a good Constituent Assembly election. Continue reading →

→ 14 Comments

Posted in Nepal in Transition 2

Tagged , , , , , ,