The IRC in Nepal
Nepal has a long history of extreme poverty and under-development, and faces significant social, economic and political challenges. A relatively small, landlocked nation of over 27 million people sandwiched between India and China, Nepal is a complex society vulnerable to a range of internal and external forces that are dominated by dynamics of conflict, elite capture of decision-making and disproportionate distribution of wealth. While the central region around the capital, Kathmandu, displays a basic level of development, the more distant, rural regions host very poor populations suffering from significant social exclusion and negligible infrastructure.
Compounding these challenges, the violent insurgency launched by the Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist (CPN-M) in 1996 and the counter-insurgency campaigns of Nepalese State military and security forces have resulted in widespread killings, human rights abuse, and mass displacement. While the nature and extent of internal displacement in Nepal is difficult to pin down, estimates point to a range of 100,000 to 250,000 people being forced to flee from their homes. Victims of displacement have included both rich and poor households – local figures of authority or economic power and the poorest of families. Within Nepal, they have sought safety in the main towns or district headquarters. Additionally, some 2 million Nepalese are thought to have crossed the porous border with India and 13,000 to have died as a result of the conflict. It is estimated that, overall, some two thirds of the population has been affected in some way by the conflict.
The end of royal direct rule, the cessation of major armed action by the CPN-M, and the recent formation of the interim government has produced an opening where some of the complex challenges of rights abuse, displacement and return can begin to be addressed. In November 2006 a historic agreement between the 7-party alliance and the Maoists was reached ending the 10-year conflict. An interim government, which includes the Maoists, was formed on 15 January 2007 and an ambitious timetable has been put in place to prepare for Constituent Assembly elections, now slated for late 2007. There is therefore an opportunity for the international assistance community to put in place programs that will facilitate the return of IDPs and build local capacities to achieve durable peace and stability.
The IRC in Nepal
IRC began work in Nepal in late 2005, assisting displaced and other conflict-affected communities in the Mid West region. We have rapidly built up a robust field presence in the region, with field offices in Surkhet and Bardiya (Mid West) and Ilam (East) acting as hubs for the delivery of integrated programs targeted at assisting in the demobilization and reintegration for former child combatants, delivering quick-impact inputs to IDP and conflict-affected households, improving field data-gathering and information analysis capacity on displacement and return, building local capacity for child protection, strengthening local education services, and reestablishing primary healthcare. More >
News & Multimedia >
Nepal has a long history of extreme poverty and under-development, and faces significant social, economic and political challenges. A relatively small, landlocked nation of over 27 million people sandwiched between India and China, Nepal is a complex society vulnerable to a range of internal and external forces that are dominated by dynamics of conflict, elite capture of decision-making and disproportionate distribution of wealth. While the central region around the capital, Kathmandu, displays a basic level of development, the more distant, rural regions host very poor populations suffering from significant social exclusion and negligible infrastructure.
Compounding these challenges, the violent insurgency launched by the Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist (CPN-M) in 1996 and the counter-insurgency campaigns of Nepalese State military and security forces have resulted in widespread killings, human rights abuse, and mass displacement. While the nature and extent of internal displacement in Nepal is difficult to pin down, estimates point to a range of 100,000 to 250,000 people being forced to flee from their homes. Victims of displacement have included both rich and poor households – local figures of authority or economic power and the poorest of families. Within Nepal, they have sought safety in the main towns or district headquarters. Additionally, some 2 million Nepalese are thought to have crossed the porous border with India and 13,000 to have died as a result of the conflict. It is estimated that, overall, some two thirds of the population has been affected in some way by the conflict.
The end of royal direct rule, the cessation of major armed action by the CPN-M, and the recent formation of the interim government has produced an opening where some of the complex challenges of rights abuse, displacement and return can begin to be addressed. In November 2006 a historic agreement between the 7-party alliance and the Maoists was reached ending the 10-year conflict. An interim government, which includes the Maoists, was formed on 15 January 2007 and an ambitious timetable has been put in place to prepare for Constituent Assembly elections, now slated for late 2007. There is therefore an opportunity for the international assistance community to put in place programs that will facilitate the return of IDPs and build local capacities to achieve durable peace and stability.
The IRC in Nepal
IRC began work in Nepal in late 2005, assisting displaced and other conflict-affected communities in the Mid West region. We have rapidly built up a robust field presence in the region, with field offices in Surkhet and Bardiya (Mid West) and Ilam (East) acting as hubs for the delivery of integrated programs targeted at assisting in the demobilization and reintegration for former child combatants, delivering quick-impact inputs to IDP and conflict-affected households, improving field data-gathering and information analysis capacity on displacement and return, building local capacity for child protection, strengthening local education services, and reestablishing primary healthcare. More >
News & Multimedia >
Comments (0)
Post a Comment