Nepal



Published May 10th, 2006 by Future Atlas

States in danger of failing

Foreign policy and the Fund for Peace have released their annual Failed States Index, a valuable tool for tracking potential instability.

Foreign Policy explains:

The category of “failed states” has become part of the strategic vernacular, and it has many definitions. For the purposes of this index, a failing state is one in which the government does not have effective control of its territory, is not perceived as legitimate by a significant portion of its population, does not provide domestic security or basic public services to its citizens, and lacks a monopoly on the use of force. A failing state may experience active violence or simply be vulnerable to violence. The great majority of the states listed in the index are not presently failed states. The index measures vulnerability to violent internal conflict. It is an index of country risk, not of countries that have already failed.

The 20 most endangered states are concentrated in Africa, and include many of the least-governed countries. Ranked from most in danger downwards, they are:

1. Sudan
2. Congo, Dem. Rep. of the
3. Ivory Coast
4. Iraq
5. Zimbabwe
6. Chad
6. Somalia
8. Haiti
9. Pakistan
10. Afghanistan
11. Guinea
11. Liberia
13. Central African Republic
14. North Korea
15. Burundi
16. Yemen
17. Sierra Leone
18. Burma
19. Bangladesh
20. Nepal

The status of all 148 rankings is mapped here.

Instability in Pakistan is potentially disastrous: it could be the first nuclear-armed state to fail, and some of the parties that might get hold of the country’s nuclear weapons have links to Islamic extremist groups.

Number 31 on the list is Egypt, a lynchpin state of the Middle East, and right behind it at 32 is Indonesia, one of the largest countries in the world.

Published April 30th, 2006 by Future Atlas

Nepal: an end, or a delay?

According to the Washington Post:

Some analysts [in Nepal] say they believe that the tumult of recent weeks could open the way for an end to the insurgency, by creating a new political framework in which the Maoists can work peacefully.

Meanwhile, the Maoist leader interviewed in the article reinforces this forecast of insurgent extremism.  The leader

denounced the mainstream parties as “status quo-ist and feudal” and said some Nepalis could be forced to undergo “reculturization” in labor camps following the inevitable triumph of the revolution.

Published April 22nd, 2006 by Future Atlas

Nepal: a forecast

On the country’s Maoist rebels:

“In their heart of hearts, this is a movement that is committed to communist ideology, and if presented on a plate tomorrow with the idea of running their own totalitarian state, it would be quite pleased to do so. But they do seem to have realized, that in the current global and regional context, this is just not going to be possible.”

– Rhoderick Chalmers, Deputy South Asia Project Director, International Crisis Group, National Public Radio, April 13, 2006

(From The ICG weekly mailing)