There were some positives in Monday's talks between the Big Three and the agitating Madheshi parties. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, for the very first time, seemed to be in a mood to listen to the grievances of Madheshi leaders. He is reported to have opened the talks with a statement that people have suffered enough and since all the leaders present at the meeting were in politics for the benefit of the same people, it was about time they found real solutions. Before Monday, Oli, as a pressure tactic, used to alienate Madheshi representatives right from the start with a rude remark about them. Monday was the first time, according to the Madheshi leaders present, when Oli appeared serious about solving problems. This is good news and it augurs well for the next round of talks scheduled for Wednesday. But the hard reality is that yet another 'decisive talks' have failed. The Madheshi delegation led by Mahanta Thakur, apparently, spent most of the time in the meeting venting their ire at the government, which, in their view, was trying to 'suppress' Madheshi agitation.If the Madheshi leaders have grievances against the government, they have every right to express them. We take this as a positive sign. But for people what counts, after two months of a crippling economic blockade that has thrown their lives out of gear, is results. They will see lack of breakthrough on Monday as more evidence of the incompetence and lack of seriousness of those negotiating on their behalf. Until now the vast majority of Nepalis have been patient. Despite provocative statements from political leaders on both the side of the divide, there have been no reported incidents of communal violence anywhere in the country. This is partly because of the understanding among Nepalis that their hardship is largely the result of a regional bully trying to gets its way, and not due to the country's internal problems per se. But frustration is rising. The longer the political deadlock is prolonged (and with it the blockade), the greater will be this frustration. If it increases beyond a point, it would manifest itself in all kinds of ugly ways: communal riots, looting, support for extremists. So it is important that solutions be found without any more delay.
In this context, the 1995 Dayton Accords that ended the Bosnian War could be instructive. For three weeks, the representatives of the three sides in negotiations—Yugoslavia, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina— were taken to a secure site (an air-force base), so that they could negotiate without any outside pressure and away from the prying eyes of media. The negotiators had two options: either they could be indefinitely holed up at the base or they could negotiate in earnest and quickly reach a solution. This American pressure tactic worked: the resulting agreement ended a bloody civil war that had resulted in 40,000 deaths. Now we need our own version of the Dayton Accords whereby the negotiators are put in a situation where the only viable option for them is to emerge with a tangible agreement. Otherwise we will have yet more 'decisive talks' that ultimately prove meaningless. We hope that the next time our political leaders sit down for talks on Wednesday, they do so fully prepared and with a mindset of meaningful give and take and giving the country a definite outlet. Or we may also soon have to take the improbable step of locking up our political leaderships at a secure location till they emerge with a solution.
Related story
Winter session of parliament falls uncertain
