The prospects for success of Nepal’s municipal elections, scheduled for February 8, 2006, are decidedly dim and, as suggested in the AFP article, the first two weeks of February 2006 may be the bloodiest in the Maoist insurgency’s 10-year struggle. A review of TRC RealNews (subscribe here) abstracts on Nepal since the article appeared on January 13 identifies a bloody (although perhaps aberrant) military attack on civilians, Maoist bomb attacks on major arteries into Katmandu, large protests in outlying towns, and the cancellation of a massive planned rally in Katmandu by curfews, house arrests, protester clashes, and cutting communication devices such as land-lines, Internet connections, and cell phones (Advisory). Thus, although King Gyanendra seized power by promising to crush the Maoist insurgency, he has been more successful at crushing democracy by steps that have engendered worldwide condemnation. The King’s heavy-handed moves seem to be having the undesired effect of pushing the unlikely and tenuous detente between the Maoists and the seven-party political coalition toward a more lasting alliance .

A small group of Nepali visitors and expatriates, including noted authors and analysts, met informally this weekend outside Washington, DC to discuss the current crisis and the origins of the Maoist insurgency. A number of observations surfaced during the discussions. First, most concur that the primary motivation behind the Maoists taking up arms against civilians and the state in February 1996 was the belief that as a political party they had not fared well enough in the elections to be taken seriously. Whereas most political parties were on nearly equal footing upon the implementation of the constitution in November 1990, the coalition of seven opposition parties and others were quicker than the Maoists to secure political reach and power both legitimately and via corruption.