Af integrations- og udviklingsminister Bertel Haarder (V)
I welcome the opportunity this conference (“Nepal in Conflict – Thursday and Friday in Copenhagen) gives us to discuss the situation in Nepal and in particular what Denmark as one of the major bilateral donors can and should do in the current situation.
Some people have questioned why Denmark and the rest of the international community continue to support Nepal in the current crisis. They question why we continue to support a non-elected government presiding over a country, where the human rights situation is not improving. Some people even argue that assistance helps to prolong the conflict.
I will briefly address these issues. And then I will turn to the subject of Denmark’s future engagement in Nepal.
Why do we stay:
We stay because we want peace, poverty reduction, and promotion of human rights for the people of Nepal. We can only support a peaceful resolution to the conflict by staying. If we leave, we would have no influence on the parties to the conflict, and the people of Nepal would be left in the hands of the Maoists.
If we leave, there is a genuine risk that Nepal would become a failed state. This would provide good opportunities to groups on a constant lookout for safe heavens from where they can plan and operate terror activities.
By staying we can add pressure on the parties to the conflict and on other key political players to make them engage in a peace process. We can threaten to leave, but we have to pick the moment for such a threat as it can only be used once.
By staying, we can continue to address the underlying causes of the conflict, preparing the ground for the time where peace again prevails in Nepal. This morning you discussed the background to the current situation. Political, social, and economic exclusion of large parts of the population, inadequate and non-responsive government, and lack of good governance as well as corruption are important factors.
Danish assistance seeks to address these issues.
Danish assistance has a positive impact on development in Nepal and contributes effectively to poverty reduction. More children are now in school, 81 pct in 2004 compared to 60 pct in 1998. Many more children including girls pass 5th grade. But more needs to be done to ensure that all girls, children of indigenous peoples, and other marginalized groups attend school.
Another example of Danish support to poverty reduction is our support for the development of the Forestry Sector. Forestry is an important source of income for many poor people. More than 1 million acres of forest has been replanted and more than 7.000 forestry groups established. App. 3,5 million people benefit from enhanced income from the forests.
And, Denmark supports democratisation and human rights. Denmark has been an active donor in support of democratic development through support to democratic institutions, and to institutions looking after the democratic institutions such as the independent National Human Rights Commission and the press.
Danish assistance has been affected by the conflict. We constantly keep the situation under review and adjust to changes in the conflict situation. We try to be innovative in our selection of implementation channels.
We want to be able to provide assistance in a way that ensures that the assistance continues to reach the poor. In recent months, more emphasis has been put on implementation through Community Based Organisations and non-governmental organisations as an alternative to using Government structures. As long as the assistance reaches the poor, we continue.
One final remark on the Danish assistance programme. It has been questioned, why we do not provide more funding through civil society organisations rather than through government structures. We use both channels and will continue to do so.
But, support through government structures has some additional advantages. It gives us access to extensive policy dialogue and possibility for exerting pressure on the state apparatus and the government to continue reforms and implementation of the country’s national poverty reduction strategy.
As to the question of how we can support a Government that is not democratically elected: It is a concern that the present government is not elected. But it represents a majority of the parties represented in the now dissolved Parliament.
We would like to see elections sooner rather than later. But, we also have to accept that the security situation has to improve before free and fair elections can be held. The present government is the best we have.
I am deeply concerned about the human rights situation. The Government as well as the Maoists commit violations. The previous Government – under strong pressure from the donors – made a number of commitments to improve the human rights situation. These commitments have been taken over by the present Government, but we have yet to see major concrete steps.
The situation in Nepal is grave. From the above, it should be clear, that that I see no alternative to staying on – as a partner in political dialogue to add pressure on parties to engage in the peace process and promote human rights, and as a donor continuing assistance effectively addressing poverty, governance and human rights problems.
Denmarks future engagement with Nepal
The objectives for our future engagement will be to support Nepalese efforts to:
1. reach a peaceful and sustainable solution to the conflict
2. establish a democratic state with respect for human rights
3. poverty reduction through poverty-oriented economic growth
A Nepal-Denmark Country Strategy for a comprehensive engagement to move towards meeting these objectives is currently being developed. The main trust of such an engagement would be:
First, political dialogue with the government as well as other key players to the conflict.
They include the opposition, the Palace, and the Army as well as civil society. Such a dialogue will be most effective if there is consensus in the international community as to the policies that should be pursued. Denmark has played and will continue to play a role in fostering broader consensus on such policies.
And second, an effective aid programme addressing root causes of the conflict and responding to the conflict as well as changes in the conflict.
The policy dialogue will focus on the following areas
The peace process:
Denmark and the European Union will continue to call on all parties to work constructively and with determination towards creating an environment conducive to dialogue and eventually to peace negotiations. We have called on the Government, the parties, the Palace and the Army to commit themselves to a joint process for peace.
We were encouraged by the recent offer by the Government to begin talks, and have called on the Maoists to respond positively to this invitation. Unfortunately, after a brief cessation of hostilities, the armed conflict seems to escalate even further.
Important to stress that the parties to the conflict are not “equal” parties. The government – while not elected – represents a good number of the so-called democratic forces in Nepal.
The other party – the Maoists – is an organisation that uses terror and violence clearly violating international norms to achieve political goals. They have chosen this avenue in a country, where they had the opportunity to use the democratic system for furtherance of their political objectives. But they chose to do otherwise.
In our calls for progress on peace, we have urged the parties to accept the offer of the UN Secretary General to facilitate the process. The international community is ready to provide the support needed to bring forward a peace process.
I would like to stress dialogue with civil society. Civil society has an important role to play in promoting the environment for peace and laying the foundation for conflict resolution also at the local level.
Human rights: Concerns about the human rights situation is mounting.
Disappearances, torture, abductions and killings are unfortunately the order of the day – committed by both the Army and the Maoists. Dialogue with the Government is extensive, but with limited results. In the short term we would like to see immediate progress on the following issues:
1) Nepal Human Rights Commissions right to – in accordance with its mandate – to investigate and monitor allegations of human rights violations including free and unhindered access to detention centres;
2) improved protection and respect for human rights, in particular with regard to the elimination of torture, arbitrary executions, and arbitrary or unlawful detention.
3) Improved basic human rights training for police and Army.
Lack of progress on the human rights agenda is a high-risk policy by the Government. If no improvements are in sight, we will have to react. We are all ready to support the Government. The UN, Denmark, and other donors in all possible ways.
But they have to show commitment and political will. The signing of the Memorandum of Understanding with the United Nations Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights – that provides for technical assistance in the human rights field – would be a good start.
Democratisation:
The establishment of a multiparty government in May 2004 was a step forward towards representative Government. We will have to keep up the pressure on this Government to continue broad based dialogue with all interest groups. And we will continue pressure on the opposition to act as a constructive opposition.
The Government has announced elections for April. We hope the situation will have improved sufficiently to conduct such elections.
Good governance:
It is a good beginning that the Government realises that bad governance is one of the root causes of the conflict. Over the past couple of years steps have been taken to root out corruption. The establishment and the functioning of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority is but one example. More needs to be done to ensure that corruption and nepotism is dealt with across the board in society.
Finally the dialogue focuses on poverty reduction and continuation of reforms:
A Poverty Reduction Strategy has been developed and is under implementation. Further efforts are needed to promote economic and structural reforms to underpin private sector led growth.
The dialogue on the implementation of the Strategy has been a useful forum for discussions of Government spending and the need to give priority to development expenditures. So far this has been the case, but we will continue to monitor the situation closely.
The Government has continued the high spending (15 pct of the government budget) in the education sector. Human development indicators in health and education have improved over recent years mainly due to continued large investments by the Government and the donor Community.
Development assistance: The other part of the comprehensive engagement:
Development assistance from Denmark will continue to address poverty, development of human resources, human rights and good governance while at the same time playing a positive role in promoting peace.
Three scenarios have been developed to ensure that the assistance strategy responds to developments in the conflict. I will briefly outline our thinking as well as our assistance strategy in each of these scenarios.
Peace scenario:
Peace process and national reconciliation: It is likely, that peace will be the result of an incremental process rather than an abrupt solution to more than 8 years of conflict.
The core element will be to build up confidence between the Maoists and the Government at central level as well as local level. The key to a successful peace process will be to ensure that possible temporary setbacks do not reverse the entire process, and that small advances are sustained.
In such a process, it will be crucial to support the forces in civil society, working for peace and reconciliation; to enhance support for democratic institutions and good governance at all levels; to support decentralisation to give people voice and influence and ensure that the government quickly provides quick peace dividends and is seen as relevant and an alternative to the Maoists.
And the international community will have to consider support to demobilisation of Maoist soldiers and to the return of internally displaced people. Such a scenario would also allow for the full scaling up our assistance to the education and environment sectors.
Muddle through – or the continuation of the current situation with a low intensity conflict and political instability
The situation will continue to be characterized by a human rights crisis, a strong split between the parties, the Palace and the Army. The conflict – albeit low in intensity – will continue to put considerable strain on the economy, the remaining democratic structures and the space for development activities.
In such a scenario, development assistance should be continued to the largest extend possible where it addresses the needs of the poor and the underlying causes of the conflict. Support through the education and environment sectors will be continued to the extent these preconditions are met.
Emphasis will be given to promoting human rights and good governance and other initiatives that can push the process towards the peace scenario. The aim is also to avoid a further escalation of the conflict and the political crisis.
Conflict escalation scenario – A collapsing State and evolving humanitarian crisis:
In a further escalation in the conflict, it is not difficult to envision state institutions breaking down – in some parts of Nepal that is already reality. Democracy will be further threatened.
A conflict/ war is likely to be protracted with immense human suffering. In such a scenario strong and concerted pressure from the international community is needed with the purpose of restoring democracy and promoting peace. In the worst case development assistance will have to be replaced by humanitarian assistance and may be delivered through NGOs.
This was a brief outline of my current thinking concerning Denmark’s future engagement in Nepal. We look forward to discussing these approaches and ideas. And revise the strategy if needed.
In conclusion, I would like to stress, that it is the people of Nepal that is at the centre of our concern. The people of Nepal has a wish and a hope for peace. We – the international community and friends of Nepal – must do our outmost to contribute to the realization of this hope, Bertel Haarder concluded.
Kilde: www.um.dk
