US embassy cable - 03KATHMANDU723

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000723 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS 
LONDON FOR POL - GURNEY 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/20/2013 
TAGS: PGOV, SOCI, PTER, ASEC, Maoist Insurgency 
SUBJECT: NEPALI MAOISTS POSTPONE FIRST ROUND OF TALKS WITH 
GOVERNMENT AMID CONTINUED STUDENT PROTESTS 
 
REF: A. (A) KATHMANDU 0677 
 
     B. (B) KATMANDU 0692 
     C. (C) KATHMANDU 0652 
 
Classified By: AMB. MICHAEL E. MALINOWSKI.  REASON:  1.5 (B,D). 
 
-------- 
SUMMARY 
--------- 
 
1.  (C) Summary:  Maoist negotiators have postponed the first 
round of "introductory" talks with their Government of Nepal 
(GON) counterparts that were scheduled to begin on April 21. 
The postponement reportedly took the Palace by surprise. 
Maoist negotiator Krishna Bahadur Mahara told the media that 
the insurgents postponed the talks because the GON was not 
prepared to discuss substantive issues in the first round. 
The excuse the Maoists gave the Palace--that they planned to 
be outside of Kathmandu on the date proposed for initial 
talks--is clearly spurious.  The Maoists likely postponed the 
talks in order to await the outcome of ongoing student 
protests and planned political party agitation and/or because 
of growing rumors of a change in the interim government.  The 
postponement, while unexpected, should not be viewed as a 
serious setback to progress toward eventual negotiations. 
End summary. 
 
-------------------- 
ROUND ONE POSTPONED 
-------------------- 
 
2.  (SBU) On April 20 Maoist insurgents postponed the first 
round of official talks with the Government of Nepal (GON), 
scheduled to begin the following morning.  Maoist spokesman 
Krishna Bahadur Mahara told the media the insurgents had 
called off the initial meeting because they were not 
convinced the GON team was adequately prepared to hold 
substantive discussions.  He added that the talks might be 
rescheduled within three or four days, but did not specify a 
date.  The Maoists did not inform the GON of the cancellation 
until after 9:00 p.m. on April 20, leaving the government 
little time to react. 
 
3.  (C)  On April 21 Prabhakar Rana, King Gyanendra's 
business partner and confidant, told the Ambassador that the 
postponement had taken the Palace by surprise.  The Maoists 
offered their travel to the southwestern district of Kailali 
as an excuse, according to Rana.  In a separate meeting later 
the same day, Foreign Minister Narendra Bikram Shah told the 
Ambassador that the GON's offer to push the meeting forward 
to as early as 7:00 a.m. in order to accommodate the Maoists' 
travel plans had been rebuffed by the insurgents.  Since the 
Maoists' "out-of-town" excuse is clearly little more than a 
pretext for delay, Shah asked, what is the real reason for 
the insurgents' decision to delay?   He indicated some 
concern regarding the role of the major political parties, 
who continue to refuse to deal with the interim government of 
Prime Minister Lokendra Bahadur Chand.  He noted that the 
parties had rejected the PM's invitation to join a committee 
to advise the GON-appointed negotiating team, and thereby 
have a role in the peace talks.  He also mentioned that the 
Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist Leninist (UML), the 
largest political party in the country, is coincidentally 
holding a Central Committee meeting in Kathmandu the same day 
originally scheduled for dialogue to begin.  Shah said that 
the PM had instructed him to meet with foreign ambassadors to 
assure them that the GON remains ready to hold substantive 
discussions with the Maoists at any time. 
 
----------------------------------- 
STUDENT PROTESTS, STRIKES CONTINUE 
----------------------------------- 
 
4.  (SBU)  One possible reason for the Maoists' decision to 
delay talks may be in order to allow ongoing student-led 
demonstrations and general strikes, or bandhs, to put 
additional pressure on the GON (Ref A).  Although the 
Maoist-affiliated student union initially helped mobilize 
other student groups aligned with the mainstream political 
parties to protest rising fuel costs (Ref C), the disparate 
groups' agendas have since mutated into an incoherent set of 
mutually contradictory demands.  Student protesters snarled 
traffic throughout Kathmandu on April 17-18, destroying 
university property and equipment and attacking police with 
stones and bricks, while a general strike called by the 
non-Maoist student unions closed businesses and halted 
vehicular traffic on April 20.  The non-Maoist unions have 
called follow-up strikes on April 23 and April 28-29.  Poorly 
trained and ill-equipped police are under growing pressure to 
contain the volatile demonstrations, which increased both in 
violence and frequency after the April 8 killing of a student 
demonstrator in southern Nepal (Ref C). 
5.  (C) While they are trying to keep a nominal distance from 
their student counterparts, trying to portray the 
demonstrations as a spontaneous, irrepressible display of 
public discontent with the GON, the party leaders are clearly 
encouraging the agitation.  Nepali Congress spokesman Arjun 
Narasingh K.C. told poloff that his party was supporting the 
demonstrations.  When poloff pointed out that Nepali 
Congress-affiliated students had proudly admitted in the 
press to committing vandalism and arson, K.C. backpedaled 
somewhat, appending to his earlier blanket statement of 
support the disclaimer that the party does not promote acts 
of violence.  He promised to pass on to party leader G.P. 
Koirala poloff's observation that criminal acts committed by 
the Nepali Congress student union reflect poorly on a party 
that had led the fight for democracy in Nepal.  In a speech 
one day later, Koirala was quoted as blaming the GON for the 
student unrest, charging that the GON "is trying to conceal 
its weakness by accusing the political parties of fomenting 
the movement. . . . They need not blame parties for what is 
happening these days.  It is the government which must take 
the blame." 
 
------------------------ 
NEW GOVERNMENT RUMORED 
------------------------ 
 
6.  (C) Another possible reason for the postponement may be 
recent speculation that King Gyanendra may be contemplating 
changing the government, replacing Prime Minister Chand with 
someone more politically astute and allowing space for 
representatives of parliamentary parties to join (septel). 
If such a change is imminent, the composition of the GON 
negotiating team may also change (Ref B).  The Maoists, who 
are said to be displeased with the choice of Deputy Prime 
Minister Mandal as lead negotiator, may be waiting to see if 
a more promising negotiating team materializes. 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
7.  (C) The Maoists named their negotiating team almost 
immediately after the announcement of the ceasefire on 
January 29 and have been criticizing the GON ever since for 
delaying talks.  For the Maoists to postpone talks after the 
GON had finally announced its team and agreed to a starting 
date for dialogue is thus more than a little ironic.  Shah's 
remarks about the mainstream political parties indicate that 
the GON is clearly concerned that the Maoists and the parties 
may make common cause against the government--thereby 
weakening the GON's position just as it enters negotiations. 
While the Maoists' move to postpone is unexpected, it need 
not be viewed as a major stumbling block to eventual 
progress.  The GON strategy so far has been to spin out the 
pre-dialogue phase for as long as possible, reasoning that 
each day of peace under the ceasefire weakens public 
tolerance for renewed violence and thus, ultimately, erodes 
remaining popular support for the Maoists.  The GON can use 
this respite to review its negotiating positions with its 
newly formed team and to renew calls for the parties to 
cooperate in its efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the 
conflict. 
 
 
 
 
MALINOWSKI