To The International Crisis Group: Please Go Away!
Those wise sages at the International Crisis Group (ICG) are at it again. They say it is time for Nepal to throw out their constitution and start over. Who are these idiots? Well, ICG is made up of a bevy of detached "intellectuals" that seems to think that they need to hold forth on all world issues. A seven-member group of east African nations called their meddling on Somalia "damaging." But these are not just independent hacks. They receive a large amount of funding from the U.S. government to press the most unrestrained wishings of the U.S. State Department. In essence, they stir the pot on behalf of Bush's less diplomatic leanings toward world policy. In a speech noted on The U.S. State department's website, R. Nicholas Burns, Undersecretary for political affairs, speaks in a tone of clear affinity for ICG and looks forward to future "collaboration" with the Brussels-based group. http://www.state.gov/p/2005/44764.htm. "SpinWatch" one of blogdai's sources for well-researched venom has written the ultimate piece on ICG where they state that:
The general ICG report does not seem to be based on any consistent theoretical or conceptual framework pertaining to conflict analysis, early warning or world system/international relations schools. While ICG reports are certainly not without information and knowledge, much remain on the level of commentarism and piecing together data from interviews with representatives of formal power, such as politicians, and readings of newspapers. Check out the full article for all you need to know about IGC http://www.spinwatch.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=807
Here's a typical ICG butchering, this time at the expense of Nepal. (Excerpted below) Full article: http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=3513&m=1 Blogdai commentary in blue.
Kathmandu/Brussels, 15 June 2005: "Nepal needs constitutional change to address the root causes of its devastating conflict and produce lasting peace. "
"Constitutional changes and the political means by which they are delivered are crucial to a peace process", says Rhoderick Chalmers, Deputy Director of Crisis Group's South Asia Project. "Unfortunately, there is little sign of agreement between the king, the political parties and the Maoists on any of the key points". That's funny Rhoderick, didn't you just hold a seminar this May where you said "Legal formalism is not essential. In fact, even the current Constitution in Nepal can work?" http://ipcs.org/newIpcsSeminars2.jsp?action=showView&kValue=1748. It seems the best that ICG can come up with for their Nepal "analyst" is a man who spends the bulk of his intellect on linguistic issues. He is listed on ICG's site as posessing a myriad of political and intermediary skills, yet none of his degree work or credentials supports anything but his linguistic background. It's nice that ICG mentions it's Kathmandu "field office," but blogdai has checked the listings and has found nothing under the name of ICG in Kathmandu
Even before the royal coup, the 1990 constitution had been undermined by the May 2002 dissolution of parliament and King Gyanendra's repeated dismissals of prime ministers. Subsequent governments had little chance of conducting successful negotiations with the Maoists as long as real power rested with the palace. WRONG! Past governments barely acknowledged the need for talks with maoists. Who sponsored the last nearly successful talks under the watch of blogdai's friend Naryan Singh Pun? The king. Who sabotaged those same talks? The parties. Also, WRONG! Those repeated dismissals were partially at the behest of the political parties themselves. If the king hoped that his unambiguous seizure of full executive authority would bring the Maoist to talks, he was mistaken. WRONG! The king seized power because he knew talks would be fruitless. Right or wrong, he is seeking a military solution, he no longer cares for talks.
The reintroduction of democratic institutions remains central to establishing a government that can negotiate with the Maoists and initiate a consensual process for constitutional change. But the palace is more concerned with consolidating royal rule, while a broader alliance of Kathmandu-centred interests has long opposed a more equitable distribution of power. WRONG! Would the King release Girija if he were trying to "consolidate?" Would the King form the powerful RCCC if he were trying to "consolidate?"
"A comprehensive settlement of Nepal's conflict cannot be achieved by military means alone nor by cosmetic changes in the government", says Robert Templer, Director of Crisis Group's Asia Program. "Ultimately, sustained negotiations will have to allow a full range of representatives to deal with the major questions. While initial negotiations to prepare the ground for substantive talks may have to be conducted discreetly, the primary condition for successful revision of the constitution will be the participation of the Nepali people". Robert Templer has never been within a thousand miles of Nepal. His credentials include writings on Viet Nam, and he has done some time in Hong Kong and Afghanistan. If he had been in Nepal he would have realized that he has just described the parameters and conditions present in all past, failed attempts to negotiate with the Maoists. Bob, if you're out there, what's the price of dhal bhat down at Dili Bazaar these days?
Nepal's constitution is a fine document. For ANY constitution to be effective it must have the complete loyalty and service of those in government who are charged with protecting and enforcing its provisions. Plus, a government must have the trust of its citizens in order to administer its constitution effectively. Nepal had neither.
To The International Crisis Group: Leave Nepal and its constitution alone. If any of you would have taken the time to realize the actual nature of your "crisis" in Nepal rather than spouting the "democracy at all costs" line, you would have seen that it was not the document, but the idiots in charge that were responsible for Nepal's current state.
To the people of Nepal: The International Crisis Group does not care about you. They publish their reports in order to maintain funding from government sources. Do not believe anything you read from the ICG regarding Nepal. The ICG's coverage of events in Nepal is innaccurate, poorly researched, and an agenda-driven fraud.
I challenge them to prove me otherwise.