Coming Anarchy in Nepal?

Almost a year ago, I predicted that without serious aid from India and the West, the regime in Nepal would eventually collapse, giving way to a Maoist horror equivalent to what we’ve previously seen in Cambodia, Ethiopia, and Afghanistan. As I write this, demonstrations are taking over the streets of Kathmandu in Nepal. When you see pictures of police beating protestors and unhinged state violence, it’s easy for naive idealists to fret about the “pro-democracy protests,” get outraged over such tactics as the police shutting down cell phone service, and even take the pro-Maoist “Democratic Nepal” blog a little seriously.

Maybe these people genuinely believe that a collapse of the monarchy will lead to a democratic regime. But consiously or not, many of these people more accurately believe something closer to what Mark Safranski deconstructed and plainly translated in a comment last year:

“I want the Maoists to win but don’t really want to say that openly because that position doesn’t have much intellectual credibility ““ and it will hamper my disclaiming moral responsibility for Maoist atrocities in Nepal after the fact, should they win.”

Look at the flags many of these demonstrators are waving in the streets, it’s not the flag of liberty.

See that hammer and sickle? To paraphrase one blogger with similar sentiments, I’d find it easy to be ecstatic about uprisings like this one and I’m all for democracy in Nepal, but the big elephant in the room is the alternative to the current regime: not a democratic panacea but a violent Maoist army. Yes, the King is a royal shit, no pun intended. But just as Robert D. Kaplan once said about the Saudis, King Gyanendra is probably the most unhelpful, reactionary regime that one could imagine, except for any other that could come into being.

AFTERNOTE: Academic apologists (or at best deliberate ignorants) on the Nepal Maoists can be seen here.