How have political dynamics influenced Security Sector Reform and peacebuilding in Nepal? How can the longstanding association of the security forces with the monarchy and with oppression and opposition to democracy be overcome? This article from the Journal of Peacebuilding and Development illustrates that a key challenge following the decade of conflict is to separate the army from palace control and bring it under civilian oversight as part of the broader national process of building democratic governance. It also highlights efforts by India, China and the United States to secure a role for the monarchy in Nepal’s emerging political system, and the threat this poses to internal security.
The challenge of establishing civilian oversight of the army in Nepal must be understood in the historical context of Nepali governance. Nepal’s army has traditionally been used as an instrument of authoritarianism by the monarchy. During the Maoist insurgency it was responsible for widespread human rights abuses. The army has never functioned as a democratic institution.
-
Civil society has played a significant role in combating the alliance of the army and the monarchy and facilitating SSR in Nepal. Civil society organisations collaborated to form the Civil Society Movement for Democracy and Peace (CMDP), organised mass non-violent demonstrations, and joined with the Maoists and the political parties to force King Gyanendra to relinquish power and agree to a democratic transition.
-
Nepal’s SSR context is also complicated by its vulnerability to external influence. It shares borders with China and India, and the US is strengthening its presence in Nepal, interested in maintaining its political, economic and security presence in the region. The US, the UK, India and even China view the Nepalese monarchy as a symbol of national unity, and there is a risk of international pressure undermining the aim of Nepal’s political parties to establish a democratic republican system.
-
SSR has progressed significantly in Nepal. Legal changes have given parliament oversight of the army, and the responsibility of maintaining order has been given to the police. The security forces’ immunity from prosecution has been revoked to promote accountability for human rights violations.
A number of challenges for security and SSR in Nepal remain. Central among these is the need to reduce the causes of the conflict, such as socio-economic and political discrimination. Further requirements are:
-
a long-term, detailed plan to downsize the 92,000-strong army and integrate the 36,000 Maoist fighters into the national army or other sectors;
-
greater transparency and accountability in the army, police, secret service and bureaucracy – the political parties must prove accountable to the people’s sovereignty rather than perpetuating elitism;
-
measures to tackle the increased crime rate and supply of small arms that resulted from destabilisation during the conflict; and
-
vigilance concerning the threat of ethnic conflict in the Terai region bordering India, and the risk of destabilisation and Indian interference.
