On Friday June 5, 2001, a family gathering in Narayanhity Palace in Kathmandu was the setting of the massacre of the royal family. It was unprecedented in scale except for demise of the Romanoff dynasty and the French Revolution. Worse still, the suspect was the now deceased Crown Prince Dipendra. According to eye witnesses an argument that started over the prince’s choice of bride eventually claimed the lives of King, Queen, the Crown Prince and his siblings. King Birendra's brother, Gyanendra, inherited the kingdom and his wife and daughter were injured in the massacre.

Generally, the outside world sees Nepal as peaceful Himalayan kingdom, a Shangri La. The assassination is not the kingdom's first brush with controversy, but actually one in a series of crises faced by Nepal since the 1990's. Since widespread protests calling for the reprisal of multiparty democracy, Nepal has suffered a series of setbacks stemming from corruption charges, economic woes, a Maoist insurgency, and its role in Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) operations directed against India. Compounding matters is the "culture shock" of a rapidly modernizing country. The events of June 5, 2001 bring to a close Nepal's most tumultuous decade leaving more questions than answers and an increasing uncertainty over Nepal's future.

Monarch & State of the Union

King Gyanendra is generally portrayed as a low-key person and since little is known about him, it has led to increased speculation. He was the Chairman of the King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation and is thought of as an environmentalist. It is speculated that he will be an active king, and many fear that he may interfere with Nepal’s democratic reforms as evidenced by his past urgings to his brother, King Birendra, for a "hard line" against the democratic parties. He is also a prominent businessman and refuses to relinquish control over his business despite his royal title. There is also considerable speculation about his links to the Maoists, and his pro China leanings. The Maoist leanings are unsubstantiated, since they have repeatedly called for the abolition of the Monarchy and have attacked factories owned by Gyanendra. His pro-Chinese leanings may be more worrisome as they may alter the balance of power in the region and strain long standing Indo-Nepal ties. As king, Gyanendra controls the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA), but it is currently uncertain that the RNA will pledge the same level of loyalty to him that it did to previous Monarchs.

The people of Nepal, have reacted with predictable sorrow over the massacre. Worsening the outcry was the confusion of the authorities who first blamed the Crown Prince for the massacre then backpedalled to claim that it was an accidental shooting. The two-person commission investigating the massacre finally held Prince Dipendra responsible and alleged the role of illicit drugs in the events. However revelations from Brigadier (Dr) Khagendra Bahadur Shreshtha, surgeon operating on Prince Dipendra, stating that there was no trace of alcohol or psychotropic agents in the Prince's blood contradict the claims of the report. These contradictions coupled with the refusal of Madhav Kumar, leader of the Nepal Communist Party-United Marxist and Leninist (NCP-UML), to join the commission may cast doubts over its credibility. When King Gyanendra was officially proclaimed ruler, protests occurred in the capital denouncing him and Prime Minister Koirala, which were put down by the police and the army. The frustration of the people stems from King Gyanendra’s image as a heavy-handed royal who does not respect Nepal political system. Many point to the recent arrest of Yubaraj Ghimire, editor of the widely circulated newspaper Kantipur, for printing a controversial article by Baburam Bhattarai, Maoist leader, as an example of the monarch's desire to curb democratic freedoms such as a free press. Public frustration is also directed at Prince Paras, known as the 'mad prince' due to several fatal hit and run accidents and his exemption from accountability due to royal immunity. The reputation of his son coupled with the public's fondness for Prince Dipendra may have prevented Gyanendra from naming his son as the new Crown Prince, as is typically done at the time of coronation. Many among the public curiously state that Gyanendra's wife and daughter sustained minor injuries and Prince Paras, his son, escaped while King Birendra’s family was literally effaced. Such questions coupled with the lack of information and mistreatment of journalists will damage the credibility of the new King.

King Gyanendra inherits a kingdom in turmoil due to a stalled economy, endemic corruption and an insurgency. The most virulent of the problems is the Maoist insurgency. The insurgency seeking to supplant both the democratic government and the Monarchy began five years ago. It has spread from a few remote districts to engulf the majority of the country. Nepal's police, under the command of the Prime Minister, have been inadequate in countering the insurgency that has claimed more than 1700 lives. So far the monarchy, despite calls from the Prime Minister, has not involved the RNA in fighting the insurgency. In current conditions, the Maoists may capitalize on the disillusionment of the citizens brought on by the government’s inability to deal with the insurgency and the controversies surrounding Gyanendra. In an effort to play on public emotions for their benefit, Maoist leader, Baburam Bhattarai, alleged that the assassination of the Royal family was the result of a conspiracy between the CIA, RAW and the current Monarch. The Maoist insurgency has the capacity to not only destroy the country’s government but also its economy and traditions.

Neighbors

China sees Nepal as a way secure its southern border while countering India's traditional influence in Nepal. Courting Nepal provides the added benefit of annoying India and a potential stepping-stone to isolating India within the subcontinent. The Sino-Nepal relationship is not one sided, Nepal benefits from financial assistance, road contacts to Tibet that facilitate trade and most importantly the "China card" with which Nepal can get more attention from India. India views Chinese involvement in Nepal as a threat to its security, since no geographic boundaries separate India and Nepal. Therefore, Chinese influence in Nepal will expose the Indian heartland and Northeast (parts of which are claimed by the China) to Chinese influence. In the past, India's fears of a Pro China Nepal were realized when Nepal acquired antiaircraft guns, missiles and small arms from China. Currently, Chinese relations with Nepal involve regular official visits and financial assistance. China has repeatedly and emphatically denied reports of support to Nepal’s Maoists, though it would be the prime beneficiary of a Maoist takeover.

India and Nepal have a unique relationship. This relationship is facilitated by historical, cultural, and economic ties, and an 1800 km open border. India and Nepal have a transit treaty, allowing Nepal the use of Indian ports to transport goods to other countries, and a trade agreement, allowing Nepal's goods free access to Indian markets. India, in 1998, accounted for about 32% of exports and 30% of imports and 36% of the total foreign direct investment in Nepal. Additionally, India offers employment to Nepali citizens, as employment prospects in Nepal are bleak and provides financial assistance in building canals, roads, and airports. All this is not to say the relationship between the two neighbors is ideal, over the years there have been numerous problems. India and Nepal have a border dispute over Kalapani, a strategic area of 35 square kilometers adjacent to the Mahakali River and near the tri-junction between India, Nepal and China. Recently, this largely dormant issue has been used by Nepal’s Left political parties to whip up a frenzy of anti-India sentiments. The open border, an essential link between the two countries is also a source of friction, both sides have expressed concern over illegal activities taking place adjacent to the border. The recent discovery of ties between Maoist insurgents and their ideological comrades, the Naxalites, especially in the Indian state of Bihar has prompted concern over the usefulness of a totally open border. Realizations that Nepal's most dangerous internal threat has links within the borders of its closest ally may have wide ranging impact on bilateral relations. Another irritant is the Laxmanpur Barrage construction by India on the River Rapti. According to sources, the barge is responsible for seasonal flooding of nearby Nepali villages. Most of the disagreements are resolved by meetings between the two sides. The border and the contentious Kalapani dispute are to be demarcated by 2002.

Over the last decade and particularly in the last few years, the ISI has set up operations in Nepal to wage war against India and sour generally sanguine Indo-Nepal relations. Burgeoning Pakistani influence in Nepal has raised alarms in India. Nepal’s open border with India serves as an ideal conduit for Pakistan to move its agents into India. Nepal's strategic location bordering the Silguiri Corridor, connecting India's Northeast with the rest of the Union, has been used by Pakistan to aid and abet terrorist groups such as the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA). The focal point of Nepal’s role in ISI operation against India was the hijacking of IC814, Indian Airlines flight originating from Kathmandu, by Kashmiri terrorists sympathetic to Pakistan. Recently, hateful comments falsely attributed to Indian movie star Hrithik Roshan, and doctored tapes of the interview which caused rioting and an anti-Indian uproar, have also focused attention on Pakistan’s activities in Nepal. The expulsion of Aslam Saboor, a staff member in the Pakistani embassy in Nepal, due to his possession of counterfeit Indian Rupees and the subsequent arrest and deportation of Mohammad Arshad Cheema, a Pakistani diplomat, for the possession of 16kg of RDX explosives disturbingly point to Pakistan's usage of diplomatic offices for the furtherance of operations against India. Perhaps more disturbing is Nepal's complacency or inability to take concrete steps to end the use of their country by Pakistan in its covert war against India.

Summary

The new King, who until recently could afford to keep a low profile must make set the record straight and end speculation about his beliefs. The King must realize the old adage of politics, the appearance of impropriety is often worse than the impropriety. Therefore King Gyanendra must clarify his position on the Maoists and his Pro-China stance, to not do so would be to invite further speculation and rumors. In the same vein, he must transfer ownership of his businesses and set an example in a country with widespread corruption. By doing this, he will reassure the people about his commitment to the democratic reforms and work towards reinstilling the faith of the public in the Monarchy. However, King Gyanendra inherits a country that is vulnerable both economically and politically. The Maoist insurgency’s stranglehold on the country will reduce the average citizen's faith in government. This will result in the insurgency gaining momentum from the disillusionment of people. In this weakened state, the Left political parties may sympathize with the insurgents further increasing their grip on the country and blurring the line between politicians and revolutionaries. The recent massacre of 40 policemen and brazen attacks by the Maoists foreshadow an increase in the tempo of the insurgency which seeks to capitalize on a weakened government. The government needs to prepare and implement a broad based anti insurgency policy taking into account the economic and political factors of the insurgency as well as having a dedicated para military force to fight the Maoists.

The events in Nepal over the last few years and particularly in the last few months present a challenge to Indian diplomacy. A heavy-handed Indian approach will push a nationalist Nepal away from India and a overly accommodating approach will not convey the seriousness of Indians concerns. Stability in Nepal is and should be the cornerstone of Indian policy. The irritants (present & future) between India and Nepal must be resolved mutually and not become political platforms for fanning the flames of hatred. India can help Nepal train an anti insurgency paramilitary group and police the border to prevent contacts between the Naxalites and the Maoists and other illegal activities. Nepal must realize that the ISI’s role in Nepal of directing operations against India will ultimately harm Nepal by souring of Indo–Nepal relations. This will affect Nepal’s economy and tourism both of which rely heavily on India. Likewise Nepal’s use of the "China card" will also increase Indian fears about a pro Chinese Nepal and may also cause a downturn in Indo-Nepal relations to the detriment of both countries.

After the demarcation of the border in 2002, King Gyanendra will have an opportunity of heralding a new age in Indo-Nepal relations. These ties build upon history and can be potentially strengthened by mutual enhancements of each other’s security, increased Indian investment and the selling of excess hydroelectric power to India. However, all this may be unfulfilled, if Nepal chooses to further ties with China that endanger Indian security or continues to turn a blind eye to ISI operations. Nepal as a state in transition with internal and external challenges must realize that despite problems, India is its best hope for a secure and prosperous future.