By Sudeshna Sarkar, IANS
Kathmandu : Though King Gyanendra’s bloodless coup triggered a nationwide uprising in Nepal and ushered in a sea change, the transformations would have happened even if the monarch had not taken the unpopular step, India’s envoy to Nepal has said.
Indian ambassador to Nepal Shiv Shankar Mukherjee, whose tenure witnessed the royal coup in 2005, 14 months of absolute rule and then an unarmed public revolt that ended the Maoist insurgency and forced the king to step down, said the irreversible changes would have occurred sooner or later.
“I think the change was inevitable,” Mukherjee said in an interview with a local Nepali television station.
“What I saw on the streets, what I saw on the faces of the people of Nepal at that time was the kind of desire that could not be swept under the carpet. It was the determination of an entire nation to take its destiny in its own hands,” he said.
The envoy said that had the king adopted a different course of action, he could have accelerated the process or could have slowed it down.
“But in my opinion the final result would be what we see today. It could have happened a little later or it could have happened a little earlier. But it would have happened,” he said.
For the first time, the outgoing envoy indicated that the Indian authorities had some prior knowledge of the coup and had tried to stop it.
“There were indications from him certainly that he was contemplating taking over power and that the political parties were going to be sidelined,” Mukherjee said in the “Disha Nirdesh” programme beamed by Avenues television Monday.
“Our reaction was negative. Our reaction was that the future of Nepal lay in adhering to the democratic path, in working with the political parties, with Nepal as a multiparty democracy. With all its flaws, we believe that this was still the best system for Nepal to govern itself,” he said.
The outgoing ambassador said India’s Nepal policy, which regarded constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy, changed because the king had changed by stepping out of his constitutional role and was trying to rule the country by force.
“Twin pillars meant a constitutional monarchy and not a monarchy with the right to rule over the nation.
“Monarchy became irrelevant. It stood for something before. And because the way things unfolded in Nepal since the king took over power, it made itself irrelevant,” he said.
Mukherjee also indicated that he was confident that the twice-postponed critical election would take place on April 10 despite the turbulence in the Terai plains.
“The people of Nepal want those elections to happen,” he said. “Twice they have lived with postponements, accepted that may be, there were difficulties.
“But third time they will not.”
The envoy said that the message had gone across to the political parties and they had run out of excuses.
“No election is 100 percent ideal,” he said. “The law and order situation should not be used as an excuse not to have the elections… Reasonably free and fair elections where we could all say it is not an ideal election, but it is good enough for us to accept the results,” he said.
Mukherjee said that polls had been held in worse conditions in parts of India. Also, he added, there was still time to reach an understanding with the dissenting groups in the Terai plains.
“We have a number of weeks before the elections which allows the government, political party leaders, civil society, including the Madhesi leaders, to try and tackle those problems in Madhes politically.
“Given the spirit of compromise, given a little give and take, I think that the political situation in Madhes can be brought around to the point,” he said.
Asked what would happen if the constituent assembly election was postponed a third time, Mukherjee’s answer was “brutally frank”.
“The bottom line is legitimacy (of the government),” he said. “In fact, to be brutally frank, the vacuum already exists.
“At the present moment, the legitimacy is not being questioned. But as time goes by, it will be questioned more and more. That makes the elections utterly crucial.
“In the absence of legitimacy all kinds of undesirable things can happen. In the absence of a legitimate government, whose writ runs legally and legitimately throughout the country, the undesirable has a much greater chance of succeeding,” the envoy said.