JULY 8, 2008
In an interview with Nepali Times this week, US Ambassador to Nepal Nancy Powell discussed the current political deadlock, the future of US development aid, the resettlement of refugees from Bhutan and threats to press freedom. This is a rare look at American foreign policy in Nepal because interviews with the current ambassador are seldom granted. The interview and photograph are by Nepali Times' Anup Prakash.
Nepali Times: How does the United States evaluate
Nepal's political transformation over the past two years, and in
particular the post-election scenario?
Nancy Powell: The
United States regards Nepal's political transformation over the past
two years from a state wracked by insurgency without a democratic
government to its current situation of relative peace with a popularly
elected Constituent Assembly and Parliament as a tremendous and very
positive achievement for which all Nepalis should be proud. However,
almost 12 weeks have passed since the April 10 election. There is an
urgent need for the political parties to find a way to establish a new
government which can address the many pressing concerns of the
country's citizens, particularly the need for security through the rule
of law. The Constituent Assembly needs to begin its important work of
drafting a new constitution.
That being said, what pitfalls do you see ahead?
Nepal
has made huge strides, but the country's transformation is far from
complete. The challenges of providing economic prosperity, truly
participatory democracy, security, and lasting stability are enormous.
Some of these challenges are the result of global issues such as the
food crisis and petroleum prices, but others are due to deeply rooted
domestic inequities and patterns which will be difficult to change.
Nepal needs to figure out ways to attract foreign and domestic
investment so it can begin to create the jobs its young population
requires. It also needs to find a way to satisfy the understandable
demands of the country's many different groups while at the same time
creating a national sense of identity that unifies all Nepalis.
Are you concerned at all that democratic values and press freedom may be threatened in the near future?
I
am very concerned and have been meeting with representatives of the
parties and the media to register that concern and discuss how the
United States can assist in promoting a free press in Nepal. Reports of
on-going threats and self-censorship as the result of political
intimidation are very worrying and need to be addressed by all Nepalis
who hope to see democracy sustained. We will continue to work with the
media to strengthen its professionalism and to protect the freedom of
the press.
How closely has the United States been working with India to coordinate policy towards Nepal?
The
United States consults regularly with the other countries with
interests in Nepal, including, of course, India, but we formulate our
own policy.
So, would you say that geostrategically there has been a change in the United States' perception of Nepal?
There has been no change.
There
have been attacks on the IOM office managing resettlement of refugees
from Bhutan. How seriously do you take the opposition to the
resettlement program?
The United States joins IOM, UNHCR, and
WFP in strongly condemning attacks against the refugees and
infrastructure used to support them. A small group of violent
extremists has shown contemptuous disregard for the free choice for
resettlement being made by the refugees. The Nepali government must put
an end to this violence, protect the refugees and the international
community that is providing assistance, and prosecute the criminals
responsible.
Don't you think your resettlement lets the Bhutan regime completely off the hook?
The
US and many other nations continue to push Bhutan to accept
repatriation. Resettlement is offered by the US and other countries
only as a last resort and so that people whose lives have been in limbo
for more than 17 years have some opportunity for a normal life.
Your
government and the Europeans have expressed concern about the arrest of
Tibetan activists here. But shouldn't you try to understand Nepal's
sensitivities and geopolitical compulsions on this issue?
We
expect the Nepali government to adhere to international and Nepali
human rights obligations regarding the detention of individuals and the
humane treatment of peaceful protesters. We understand and respect
Nepal's national security concerns and, certainly, the importance of
protecting diplomatic premises, but believe the recent arrests and the
harsh treatment accorded peaceful protestors violate Nepal's own laws.
Once and for all, can you clarify for us what the status of the Maoists is in the State Department's terror watchlist?
The
CPN-Maoists are currently designated on the Terrorist Exclusion list
and Specially Designated Nationals list. They are not and never have
been on the Foreign Terrorist Organisations list.
How are US-funded projects in Nepal now going to be handled? Are the priorities going to change?
US
foreign assistance programs will continue to support the government's
most important development priorities. We, like all Nepalis and other
donors, are anxiously awaiting the formation of the new government and
the enunciation of its development priorities. We currently have three
assessment teams in Nepal to review priority needs in the democracy and
governance, economic growth, and peace building areas. While these
teams have been meeting with government officials, civil society
leaders, rural communities and other donors, they have not had an
opportunity to benefit from meeting the new ministers.
We plan
to continue our collaboration with government, beneficiaries, and other
partners as we implement future programs. The US provided more than $75
million in foreign aid to Nepal last year, which is the highest level
of US foreign assistance funding allocated to Nepal in recent years. We
expect our fiscal year 2008 budget to reach similar levels. In fact,
our Congress just appropriated an additional $7 million in fiscal year
2008 funds for Nepal to support the democratic transition and promote
economic growth. We plan to maintain our support for the implementation
of the peace process and the transition to a more representative
democracy and support the Nepali government's plans to provide health
services to all citizens. In addition, we have just begun programs to
increase agricultural productivity, to repair public infrastructure in
flood and conflict-affected areas, and to increase rural incomes
through vocational training.
But are there concerns about the new government's commitment to the private sector, free market and FDI?
I
firmly believe that only higher levels of inclusive growth can deliver
lasting poverty reduction which will help to stabilise Nepal, and only
the private sector can deliver that growth. The Communist Party of
Nepal (Maoist), which we expect to lead the new government, has
expressed a commitment since the CA election to support the private
sector, the free market and foreign direct investment, but its actions
and those of its supporters will need to match that rhetoric. The
government will play a very important role in creating the policy
environment in which the economy can grow. We strongly hope that the
new government will recognise that the private sector is by far the
most powerful engine for economic growth.
On
a slightly more personal note, people here have remarked on your
low-key style compared with your predecessor. How much of a difference
does the personality of the ambassador make in diplomacy?
When
I arrived in August 2007, I noticed that Nepalis were speaking out with
a great deal of courage and force to protect their rights and to move
the country toward elections. I did not want to drown out those voices
with mine and hope that I have successfully found other ways to express
my support for their efforts.
........................................................................
