Transition but not Transformation: How Nepal’s liberal peace fails its citizens

Simon Robins

Transition but not Transformation: How Nepal’s liberal peace fails its citizens

Politics

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

Nepal’s peace process has been hailed as a success both at home and abroad simply because armed conflict has not resumed. Domestically, political elites laud a successful transition through which they have re-established a polity in which all major political actors – from both sides of the conflict – have consolidated their positions and ensured a continuation of patronage based, corruption driven governance. It is worth then returning to Nepal’s Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA, 2006) to understand the extent to which the current condition of both nation and state contradict the ambition of that document. Here the letter and the spirit of the CPA will be contrasted with what political transition has actually meant in Nepal. It will be argued that the transformative ambitions of the CPA have been sacrificed in favour of a process constrained by an ideological and globalized understanding of a liberal peace (Duffield, 2001; Paris, 2004) that has in turn been instrumentalised by Nepalese elites to their own advantage.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Nepal Transition to Peace: A Decade of the Comprehensive Peace Accord (2006-2016)
Publisher	Nepal Transition to Peace Initiative
Publication status	Published - 2016

Cite this

@inbook{5a06d64fd5b14527ab37ef225f43fd9d,

title = "Transition but not Transformation: How Nepal{\textquoteright}s liberal peace fails its citizens",

abstract = "Nepal{\textquoteright}s peace process has been hailed as a success both at home and abroad simply because armed conflict has not resumed. Domestically, political elites laud a successful transition through which they have re-established a polity in which all major political actors – from both sides of the conflict – have consolidated their positions and ensured a continuation of patronage based, corruption driven governance. It is worth then returning to Nepal{\textquoteright}s Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA, 2006) to understand the extent to which the current condition of both nation and state contradict the ambition of that document. Here the letter and the spirit of the CPA will be contrasted with what political transition has actually meant in Nepal. It will be argued that the transformative ambitions of the CPA have been sacrificed in favour of a process constrained by an ideological and globalized understanding of a liberal peace (Duffield, 2001; Paris, 2004) that has in turn been instrumentalised by Nepalese elites to their own advantage.",

author = "Simon Robins",

year = "2016",

language = "English",

booktitle = "Nepal Transition to Peace: A Decade of the Comprehensive Peace Accord (2006-2016)",

publisher = "Nepal Transition to Peace Initiative",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Transition but not Transformation

T2 - How Nepal’s liberal peace fails its citizens

AU - Robins, Simon

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Nepal’s peace process has been hailed as a success both at home and abroad simply because armed conflict has not resumed. Domestically, political elites laud a successful transition through which they have re-established a polity in which all major political actors – from both sides of the conflict – have consolidated their positions and ensured a continuation of patronage based, corruption driven governance. It is worth then returning to Nepal’s Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA, 2006) to understand the extent to which the current condition of both nation and state contradict the ambition of that document. Here the letter and the spirit of the CPA will be contrasted with what political transition has actually meant in Nepal. It will be argued that the transformative ambitions of the CPA have been sacrificed in favour of a process constrained by an ideological and globalized understanding of a liberal peace (Duffield, 2001; Paris, 2004) that has in turn been instrumentalised by Nepalese elites to their own advantage.

AB - Nepal’s peace process has been hailed as a success both at home and abroad simply because armed conflict has not resumed. Domestically, political elites laud a successful transition through which they have re-established a polity in which all major political actors – from both sides of the conflict – have consolidated their positions and ensured a continuation of patronage based, corruption driven governance. It is worth then returning to Nepal’s Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA, 2006) to understand the extent to which the current condition of both nation and state contradict the ambition of that document. Here the letter and the spirit of the CPA will be contrasted with what political transition has actually meant in Nepal. It will be argued that the transformative ambitions of the CPA have been sacrificed in favour of a process constrained by an ideological and globalized understanding of a liberal peace (Duffield, 2001; Paris, 2004) that has in turn been instrumentalised by Nepalese elites to their own advantage.

M3 - Chapter

BT - Nepal Transition to Peace: A Decade of the Comprehensive Peace Accord (2006-2016)

PB - Nepal Transition to Peace Initiative

ER -