Verbatim 1
“We have always said that the CA election was a key moment in the peace process but it’s certainly not the end of it by any means. There are other issues to be addressed and it’s important that the parties’ together look now at what more has to be done to take forward the peace process towards a successful conclusion.” –Ian Martin, Chief, United Nations Mission in Nepal, talking to journalists after his meeting with the Prime Minister on Friday (18 April).
Verbatim 1
“We extended their work period by six months earlier. A new National Army will be formed by integrating the Nepal Army and the People’s Liberation Army and the UN will not be needed as the new government can carry out the integration.” –C.P. Gajurel, CPN Maoist leader and Foreign Affairs chief of the party.
We always knew that Maoists didn’t like the UNMIN, a bureaucratic monster that was needed as a referee for Nepali peace process, for various reasons. A Maoist leader was on record criticizing the UN mission for preposterous spending on logistics like choppers, plane(s) and fleet of cars. “We have 20 thousand PLA but not a single chopper,” the leader said. “Why to UNMIN who are here to monitor the PLA need choppers and that many cars?”
That’s a very valid question. Like all UN agencies, UNMIN is the center of looting in the name of Nepali peace process.
It would be very nice if Nepal can handle the situation on its own. But the integration is a very complicated task which must be dealt with very sensitively. We might need some help from outside. The must attractive option seems to be quickening the process of integration (be that into the Nepali Army or managing the PLA into various other security apparatuses. Maoist chairman Prachanda has already hinted that PLA could be used for Industrial security force. It should also be noted that Nepali Army has been saying that politically oriented groups shouldn’t be integrated into the national army that must be apolitical.
UNMIN was set up to monitor the peace process and conduction of CA polls in August 2006 after the April movement and its term is due to expire in June. It’s also worth noting that India has never been comfortable with the presence of UNMIN in Nepal. Coincidently, Maoists are looking for India positive view to their effort of forming the next government. Are they talking about not extending UNMIN’s stay in Nepal to appease India? It’s regrettable if that is the motive behind the latest remarks of the Maoist leadership.
United We Blog 
Comments
4 responses to “UNMIN Politics: Who's Behind the Maoist Statement?”
PLA is a army loyal to Prachanda and Maoists unless they are given an army style brainwashing trainings.
After we have peace why do we need “Industrial Security Force”? The ISF will be doing works of a Industrial Torture Force.
Don’t these de-fanged royalists get it yet?
The people have spoken, through the People’s War and now in the CA elections. The (Royal) Nepal Army was built to defend the monarchy, which is over. The People’s Liberation Army was built from the people up in the course of struggle. It is the national army, and the royals should have the grace to accept this situation.
All armies are “political”. Some just have better politics.
Good luck on re-building the army root and branch to reflect the will of the people. Good luck on dealing with the die-hards who despise the people all the more for standing up right like free men and women in the face of Gyenendra’s reign of terror. It’s over, kid. Get with the program.
First of all, we should understand that UNMIN is in Nepal on the request of the Government of Nepal to facilitate the peace process within the limitations of its mandate. So, it’s obvious that UNMIN will be (and should be) in Nepal only until it acheives its mandate.
Lastly, Maoists have used UNMIN as nothing but a tool to tag itself with an international recognition and it’s not surprising at all to hear such remarks from the Maoist leadership after such an impressive lead in the CA.
The role of UNMIN sounds positive for establishing peace in Nepal. Negative attitudes towards the role of UNMIN have to be root out.