---

Nepal

My Lords, I join with others in thanking the noble Earl, Lord Sandwich, for bringing this issue before us today and reminding us of the very significant interests which we in this country should have, and seek to have, in the affairs of Nepal. From my list of the most important interests, I offer three. First, the UK is already a significant donor to Nepal and I hope that it will be a bigger donor in the future. Secondly, Nepal, far from being a faraway country at the edge of global affairs is in fact at the centre of the emerging new world pattern between the awakening giant economies of rising Asia. We in Europe have to get used to the fact that the centre of gravity in world affairs is moving away from the Atlantic Basin and certainly from Europe. It is in the world of which Nepal is nearly at the centre that the fate of mankind and the pattern of world development will be settled. That means that we should watch very closely what is happening in those parts. Thirdly—the point has been eloquently made—Nepal is the home of the Ghurkhas who have done and continue to do so much to underpin and support UK security and nowadays the UK’s contribution to world peace and stability, as the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Bramall, rightly reminded us—and as that rather moving statue in Whitehall by the Banqueting House reminds one every day when one walks past it. So we want to see the goals of the people of Nepal fulfilled: of securing a stable democracy, securing security and achieving prosperity. It is in our interests, to put it at its narrowest, to work to see that that is so. As the noble Earl, Lord Sandwich, reminded us, Nepal now seems—one says this always with some hesitation—to be moving in the right direction after the very stormy and tragic events of recent years and recent times. There are signs of optimism that the civil leaders are working together. As a number of noble Lords have reminded us, there are talks now instigated between the parties—now the Government—and the Maoist insurgents. Having said that, we must be, as I am sure noble Lords are, open eyed about these insurgents. These are people who have acted brutally and with total disregard for human rights. These are people whose currency is kidnapping, torture and extortion. Their grip on the countryside is said still to be very tight indeed. One is entitled, therefore, to wonder just how deep their commitment to multiparty democracy can ever be or what they really want from their insistence on a new constitution. Indeed, one wonders what they can possibly stand for nowadays given that Maoism is a totally discredited political creed and that not even in China does it get more than a genuflection, having failed the people at every turn. It takes a big leap of faith—which I think that we should take—to believe that with that sort of track record the insurgents have really abandoned their goal of setting up a one-party, authoritarian state. Please can we never forget, although some people do, that merely participating in elections and getting in large numbers of votes, does not automatically make people into democrats? A vote for certain types is all the more likely to be the last free vote that people ever get. I know that we have already taken steps to focus our assistance programmes on strengthening democracy and governance as well as the protection of human rights, and that is good and sensible. Now, of course, we need to work with international partners ever more closely to help support the people of Nepal in their quest for a brighter future. Among those partners India has the key role—India, which used to be called the jewel in the crown 100 years ago and is now the jewel in the Commonwealth. Clearly, as in many other aspects of global affairs today, India is the key to the future. The ties that bind India and Nepal—economic, cultural and historical—are as strong as those between any two countries and mean that they are deeply vested in each other’s success and are intimately familiar with each other. For those reasons we must obviously place the highest priority on consulting India on Nepal policy. I would very much like to hear how those consultations have gone so far, and what more is planned. Those who believe—as I confess I do—in the enduring and stabilising virtues of the institution of monarchy will, on balance, wish the King to stay. Different views have been expressed in this debate but I side with the noble Earl, Lord Sandwich, in saying that this could be a basis for building an institution of monarchy that really assists the democratic process, as it does in many other parts of the world, including ours, and that any overly rapid dismissal or abolition of monarchical institutions can sometimes make things very much worse rather than better. But, of course, Nepal’s future is in the hands of its own people and its political leaders and they are the ones who must take steps to meet the people’s aspirations. I merely sum up by saying that we on this side of the House stand behind the people’s rights to make that choice themselves through a free and fair political process and we will stand against any who attempt to deny them the freedom that is their right. I hope that that is the Government’s position, too.