MR NEPAL LUCKS OUT

The Economist
May 28th 2009

See this article with graphics and related items at http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13754069



But his country, of the same name, is struggling.

ON MAY 23rd Madhav Kumar Nepal, the communist son of a Hindu priest,
became Nepal's new prime minister. He succeeds Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the
country's former Maoist leader--the main protagonist in a decade-long
guerrilla war--who resigned on May 4th, leaving the government in
limbo. Mr Nepal has the support of 21 of the 24 political parties in
Nepal's assembly; but this is scarcely democratic progress. The
Maoists, who won 38% of the assembly's seats in the country's first
post-conflict election last year, do not support him. Nor did Mr Nepal
win either of the two seats he contested in the poll.

Among many threats to his new government, the Maoists loom large. Mr
Dahal, who resigned after he was foiled in an effort to sack an old
enemy, Nepal's army chief, General Rookmangud Katawal, has said they
remain committed to democracy. Yet the Maoists had until last week
stopped the assembly functioning since their chief's resignation. And
they still demand that the president, Ram Baran Yadav, should reverse
his decision to veto General Katawal's sacking. Backed by Mr Nepal and
his allies, who consider the army a last defence against the Maoists,
Mr Yadav will not do this. On May 24th the Maoists spurned an
invitation to join the new government.

With luck, it may survive for a while. It might even try easing the
country's severe power and fuel shortages. That would quell some of the
growing discontent at the failure of any party to deliver on its
election promises. But the early signs are not promising, with Mr
Nepal's coalition partners bitterly feuding over the division of
cabinet spoils.

More important, there seems little prospect of this government making
much progress on the assembly's two main tasks--shepherding a
complicated peace process and drafting a new constitution. Under Mr
Dahal's more solid government, including the Maoists, Mr Nepal's UML
(for Unified Marxist-Leninist) and other parties, these were daunting:
the thorniest issue of the peace process, the fate of 23,000-odd former
Maoist fighters, led indirectly to its demise. (Some of these fighters
are to be recruited into the army; but General Katawal, to the Maoists'
fury, has resisted this.) And if Mr Nepal's government cannot resolve
these issues, it had better make way for one that can.