![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
A plethora of literature explains how armed conflicts terminate in nonviolent political settlements. However, little is known about how and why nonviolence functions as a mechanism of conflict transformation. Using the case study of the 2006 April Uprising (Jana Andolan II) in Nepal, this paper shows how the nonviolent struggle was a vehicle for the termination of the armed conflict that ravaged the country for a decade (1996–2006). The collaboration between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and the Communist Party of Nepal Maoist (CPNM), erstwhile enemies, led to nonviolent collective action, driven by the convergence of interests of these two key actors towards fighting a common enemy: the royal Palace. The paper argues that the nonviolent struggle also transformed strategies, attitudes and behaviour of key actors, including the CPNM, which ultimately transformed conflict issues into peace issues and induced structural changes in the long run. Thus the processes of actor transformation, issue transformation and structural transformation catalysed by the April Uprising explain why and how the nonviolent struggle functioned as a catalyst for the termination of the armed conflict.
Notes
1 Although the CPNM split off into several splinter groups after the 2006 peace process, in this article, when we speak of CPNM, we refer to the original organisation as the mobiliser of the armed conflict in Nepal.
2 The monarchy was active in Nepal until the 1990s. After the success of the people’s movement (Jana Andolan) in 1990, the then King agreed to share power with parliamentary political parties and remain as a constitutional monarch. However, the King still held some powers, such as Chief of Command of the then Royal Nepal Army.
3 The first peaceful Jana Andolan I (people’s movement I) occurred in 1990 against the partyless Panchayat system and its protagonist, the monarchy. This nonviolent movement converted the active monarchical system into a multiparty democratic system with a constitutional monarchy.
4 The Seven Party Alliance was a coalition of seven Nepali political parties seeking to end autocratic rule in the country. This group comprised the Nepali Congress, Nepali Congress (Democratic), CPNUML, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party, Nepal Sadbhawana Party (Anandidevi), United Left Front, and People’s Front.
5 India’s role in bringing the Maoists to the peace process calls for a more detailed investigation because, while India labelled the CPNM a terrorist organisation, many of CPNM’s key meetings were held in India, and India’s support in bringing the CPNM and SPA to sign the 12-point agreement is unclear and questionable.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
D.B. Subedi
DR D.B. SUBEDI holds a PhD in Peace Studies from the University of New England, Australia. He lectures in the School of Humanities at the University of New England. He has published several articles and edited books on conflict transformation, peacebuilding, post-war recovery, reconciliation, violence prevention, radicalisation and countering violent extremism, and has done fieldwork in South and South East Asia, especially Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Myanmar.
Prakash Bhattarai
DR PRAKASH BHATTARAI holds a PhD degree in Peace and Conflict Studies from the University of Otago, New Zealand. He also holds master’s degrees in Population Studies (Tribhuvan University, Nepal) and in International Peace Studies (University of Notre Dame, USA), and has been a visiting research scholar at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, Sweden. He is currently acting as President of the Centre for Social Change (CSC), a Kathmandu-based non-profit research and advocacy institute. He has published on topics including mediation, peacebuilding, and nonviolence.