Prachanda also pledged that his party would hold no grudge against the NepalArmy, much vilified in the past by the Maoists, and solicited all help from theArmy, the Armed Police force, the para-military forces that were set up to fight‘terrorists’ some five years ago, the Nepal Police and the government’sintelligence wing, the National Investigation Department. Invoking the ‘nationis under threat’ slogan, he said his topmost priority was to save thecountry’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. "If thatcannot be saved, democracy and republic will lose all relevance," adding,further, that "one party, one man or one institution alone can not savethis." Touching on this most emotive issue, Prachanda solicited individualand institutional support, but, at no stage, did he reveal where the threatemanated from. Many read this statement as an indication that Prachanda is in nohurry to integrate the Maoist People’s Liberation Army (PLA) with the NepalArmy.
As Prime Minister, Prachanda is certainly trying to dispel the impression athome that the Maoists, once in power, will establish authoritarian one-partyrule. There are still fears in the public that, with the monarchy voted out in acaptive CA that did not even allow a debate on the issue, the Maoists wouldtarget the Nepal Army, the judiciary -- mainly the Supreme Court -- and theMedia, institutions that could create organized resistance to authoritarianism.Prachanda’s appeal will, however, still be seen more as a tactic than a changeof heart and mission, since other senior leaders of his party have said thattheir war for a ‘people’s republic’ will continue from the government, CAand the street. All Prachanda’s pledges, including the one that his governmentwould respect press freedom and human rights are, consequently, met with visibledegrees of public distrust.
The Maoists are yet to return the property they ‘confiscated’ fromindividuals during the years of conflict -- something Prachanda pledged to dolong ago, when he signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement way back in 2006. TheYCL is presently lying low, but its military structure has not yet beendismantled. Prachanda will now be judged more on delivery than on rhetoric. Inother words, he may not have a reasonable spell of what is called a ‘honeymoonperiod’ which any new government would normally enjoy. The reason is simple:either as an insider or an outsider, the CPN-M has determined the course ofpolitics and major political decisions in the country ever since they joined thepeace process in April 2006.
Apart from the law and order situation being at its lowest ebb, the country hasbeen suffering from acute shortages of fuel and cooking gas for the past twoyears, mainly due to the huge arrears of the Nepal Oil Corporation against theIndian Oil Corporation, the sole supplier for Nepal. The country’s far-westernand some eastern areas have already been declared scarcity hit, with starvationlooming large. The government’s ability to deliver, or lack thereof, willlargely dictate how people will view the new government. Further, the UML and NCdecision to stay away from the government not only makes the Constitutionwriting process difficult, it also endangers the peace process. That will have adirect bearing on the prospects of the government.
But Nepal’s politics has an equal, if not greater, external component as well.India mediated and brought the Maoist and pro-democracy forces together in theanti-monarchy platform, getting them to sign a 12-point Agreement way back inNovember 2005, but is now sore over the Maoists’ perceived pro-China tilt,seeing Prachanda’s recent visit to Beijing as evidence.
Prachanda has, at times, shown scant respect for India’s security concerns,and is on record having supported a ‘plebiscite’ in Jammu and Kashmir and inIndia’s Northeast. As he moved closer to the power, however, he and hisdeputy, Baburam Bhattarai, have tried to convince Delhi that they would respectIndia’s genuine security interests and not allow Nepal to be used against itssouthern neighbour. In the same breath, however, they have also said that allthe major treaties that Nepal has signed with India need a review, if considerednecessary, may be scrapped. The first such treaty they have in mind is the 1950Treaty of Peace and Friendship, besides other agreements concerninghydro-projects. The day following his takeover, Prachanda said that the firstever hydro-power treaty that Nepal signed with India (the Kosi project) was a‘historic blunder’ and that he would take the devastation caused by the Kosiflood on the Nepal side to the international community.