The Department for International Development (DFID) is reorganising its Security and Justice material with a view to presenting it on one website by the end of 2010.
For justice, conflict and fragile states resources visit the
Nepal’s peace process, which has always been predicated on a fragile political consensus, is in danger of collapse. This paper, published by the International Crisis Group, discusses political and regional factors that threaten the 2006 peace settlement that ended the ten-year civil war. Averting a return to conflict requires cooperation between parties to address their differences, and international backing of the process, including a decisive lead from India.
Nepal's peace process rests on the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that depends on interlocking commitments which neither the government nor the Maoists entered into wholeheartedly. Parties to the peace talks were not the same as the parties to the conflict.
The CPA was also not as comprehensive as its name implied. It was vague on the future of the two opposing armies and silent on the question of militias and demilitarisation. There was little in the way of a sustained process. Inter-party committees met only sporadically; there were no effective mechanisms to monitor the commitments that held the deal together.
The following factors have contributed to the current fraying of Nepal’s political consensus:
In order to diminish the chances of further political polarisation:
Author: International Crisis Group
Source: International Crisis Group, 2009, 'Nepalâs Future: In Whose Hands?', Asia Report No. 173, International Crisis Group
Size: 53 pages (1.33 MB)