Coup in Maldives: A lesson for all in South Asia

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The atoll nation of the Maldives is once again in political turmoil. Democracy that was introduced first time in this Indian Ocean nation only three years ago was trampled by a coalition of different interest groups including Islamic extremists and loyalists to former dictator Mymoon Abdul Gayoom, who was ousted from power in the wake of popular unrest in 2008 followed by a general election based on universal franchise. In the first ever free and fair presidential election, the opposition icon Mohamed Nasheed was overwhelmingly elected as the President promising sweeping changes in the tiny country comprising groups of small islands in the Indian Ocean. Former dictator president Gayoom suffered a humiliating defeat in the polls.

However, in the new turns of events, popularly elected president was recently forced to resign under pressure by the security forces at gun point, which the ousted president Naseed has described as a soft coup and a big setback to democracy in the Maldives. In his resignation statement, which he was forced to sign, Naseed said: "I wish the Maldives would have a consolidated democracy. I wish for justice to be established. My wish is for the progress and prosperity of the people". Ever since he came to power through a popular voting, Naseed had tried to undo several decisions and moves of his predecessor, which cost him dearly. Apart from challenging the religious forces in the Maldives, who are said to be powerful in political and social influence, Nasheed had ordered the arrest of a judge of the Criminal Court over some wrongdoing, which had annoyed some hardliners and loyalists of former President Gayoom. The judge was believed to have tried to block the legal action against former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom for his wrong doing and human rights violation during his long rule. This was one of the reasons that triggered the coup. Instead, the Criminal Court has issued warrants for Nasheed on instruction of new president Mohammed Waheed Hassan. Naseed is Hassan\'s mentor but he has now turned an arch foe and an ally of the forces that plotted a coup.

Coups do not take place suddenly. Nor has the coup any rationale. In most cases, coup is staged at the whim of power hungry dictators. A coup needs a long plan and preparation. But Naseed failed to sense the conspiracy against him which is his biggest mistake. Naseed is a political activist and supporter of non-violent movement. But he lacked political shrewdness that gave opportunity to his critics and opponents to regroup and plot against him.

Coup can never be justified and nor can be the ouster of a democratically elected government at gun point acceptable. All democratic forces, countries and people must condemn the undemocratic move In the Maldives. Unfortunately, some countries in the world as well as in the region that claim to be the messiah of democracy and democratic values have, instead of condemning the coup in the Maldives, hobnobbed with the coup plotters. The United States of America always champions democratic values in the world. But it has failed to take any action against the coup plotters in the Maldives. Instead it has demanded an early election. India, which also claims to be the largest democracy in the world, is toeing US line as far as the recent events in Maldives are concerned. Election is the best way of exercising democratic rights by the people to choose their representatives and the government. In the case of the Maldives, election had been held only three years ago. Ousting the democratically government at the whim of dictators should not be justified in the name of holding early election. Coup is coup and it is undemocratic act which should never be supported under any pretext. Against this background, the stance and position of the United States and India is against democratic norms and values, which cannot be unacceptable for democracy loving people in the world. In this had been staged against Mymoon Abdel Gayoom\'s dictatorial regime in the Maldives. India sent its troops to crush the coup and protect Gayoom\'s dictatorial regime to justify India\'s decision to send troops to the Maldives to suppress the coup plotters. Sending troops to any other sovereign country under any pretext and interfering in other\'s internal affairs is against the international rule and norms. India\'s move to end troops is a violation of international rule. The question of settling political and other issues is the business of the Maldivian government and its people. And it is not the business of external forces to meddle and intervene in political affairs of other country. It exposed India\'s intention that India always wants to meddle in its neighbour\'s affairs. Secondly, 9it has also exposed time New Delhi protects dictators if they toe India\'s line. This is well illustrated in its support to Maldives\' Gayoom and Bhutan\'s absolute monarchy. When dictator was in trouble in the Maldives, New Delhi sent troops but it has not spoken even a single world to criticize the coup against the democratically elected government in the Maldives. India\'s silence implies that New Delhi has tacit support to coup in Maldives. New Delhi has already started hobnobbing with the new regime in Maldives and echoing the voice of former dictator Gayoom of holding early election.

The anti-democratic forces and loyalists to previous dictatorial regime are behind the coup. They ousted the democratically elected government and imposed a government comprising handpicked people. Naseed and his regimes, too, are partially responsible for emboldening the plotters. Since coming to power in 2008, Naseed introduced ultra capitalism in Maldives, which benefited a few rich and upper class people while majority of middle class, poor and marginalized people were rendered vulnerable. As a result, majority of the people in the Maldives got frustrated with the new government headed by Naseed. Coup plotters cashed in on people\'s frustration and staged a coup against him.

The case of Maldives is a symptom of a newly emerging trend in South Asia. Dictators are slowly regrouping and reorganizing against the democratic polity. The armed forces are also trying to have upper hand in political affairs in all South Asian countries. There are instances of confrontation and conflict between the civilian government and armed forces in all countries in South Asia. In Maldives, a coup has already been staged. In Pakistan, there is an open confrontation between the democratically elected government and the army. The conflict between the government and the army is likely to escalate in future in Pakistan. In Bangladesh, a coup plot against the elected government of Sheikh Hasina was foiled before the conspiracy could take any shape. In Sri Lanka, the relationship between the army and the government is not smooth and good. There is a friction between the Sri Lankan government and the army over the issue of punitive action against the former army chief. The relationship between the government and the army in India is relatively smooth. Not much has been heard about the political ambition of Indian army. But a recent case that involved friction between the government and the army over the age issue of the army chief is an indication that confrontation between the army and the government is slowly brewing in India, too. In Nepal, army has been assertive especially on issue concerning the integration of the Maoist combatants. The political parties in Nepal are trying to instigate and provoke the army. This is not a good practice because provoking and instigating army would ultimately encourage the army to poke into politics. So far, Nepal\'s army is professional and it has kept itself aloof from the politics. But the activities of politicians and political parties may drag army into politics which would be very unfortunate.

We have witnessed a new wave of democratic upsurge sweeping the world sending dictators to pack up in different countries. The recent examples are Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. Democratic movements are snowballing in other countries of Asia and Africa. Only recently, the military junta in Myanmar has relaxed its brutal control. People in Syria and other Arab countries are resolutely raising the banner of democracy high. But democracy has backpedalled in the Maldives which is not a good sign for democratic development and its consolidation. India seems to be behind the conspiracy against democratic government in Maldives, which clearly shows its double standard. South Asian countries and regimes should learn a lesson from the incidents of Maldives. This is a warning to democratic regimes in South Asia that establishing democracy is difficult but more difficult is to sustain democracy. The loyalists of the old dictatorial regime are always active and seeking opportune time to hit back. This is particularly so in Nepal as we are in the process of institutionalizing the achievements of popular movement. Now the monarchist forces that lost their laurels in the wake of popular movement in 2005 are trying to regroup and reorganize to sabotage the new political process. Nepal\'s political parties need to learn lesson from the incident of the Maldives and remain cautious about the possible conspiracy of the reactionary forces in Nepal.

The author can be reached at: yubanath@wlink.com.np