When the dust began to settle after the Jana Andolan (People's Movement) of April 2006, Nepalis expected that foreign assistance would come pouring in, making up for lost time in development – time that had been taken up addressing the Maoist 'people's war' and King Gyanendra's takeover. This expectation of an aid bonanza was well founded, since none of the 33 'development partners' – donor countries and organisations – listed in the roster of the Ministry of Finance had spared any rhetoric in committing to support Nepal's transition into a post-conflict democracy. But 16 months on and fast closing in on the crucial Constituent Assembly polls, slated for 22 November, the expected flood has not even amounted to a trickle.
After devoting almost a year in ushering the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) into the government, in January 2007 the government created the Nepal Peace Trust Fund (NPTF), with an eye to mobilising funds to strengthen peace and restart development. The money was to be used for the rehabilitation of displaced people and Maoist fighters, rebuild infrastructure destroyed by the rebels, hold the Constituent Assembly elections, support law and order, and maintain the cantonments in which former Maoist fighters are sequestered. The NPTF thus comes closest to a fund created specifically for Nepal to access the 'peace and development dividend', a largesse that the population has a right to expect for having created such a mass upsurge for pluralism and tranquillity. But as of late August, the internationals had put a meagre NPR 909 million into the till, or roughly USD 14 million.
Of the 20 bilateral donor countries listed in the Finance Ministry's directory, only five – Britain (USD 4.8 million), Finland (USD 4 million), Norway (USD 2 million), Denmark (USD 3.6 million) and Switzerland (USD 1.5 million) – have made contributions to the NPTF. This could indicate one of several things: an unwillingness to trust the government of Nepal to disburse funds in the continuing political instability that has followed the People's Movement; a lack of appreciation of the achievement that was the People's Movement; or the inability of a government caught in incessant turbulence to raise the required money. Indeed, for the two to three billion dollars that the Nepali people had a right to expect, the fact that the Kathmandu government could not be trusted to raise even USD 15 million is pitiable, indicating the donors' lack of seriousness and generosity, and the government's inability.
The men at the ministry maintain that they have done everything possible to raise money for peace and reconstruction. Alongside the complex peace negotiations, officials in Kathmandu have put together a three-year plan for reconstruction and development, done the math, and come up with an estimate of funds needed to kick-start growth after a decade of diversion. The National Planning Commission's tab for a complete overhaul is placed at USD 2.5 billion. Yet donor contributions since April 2006 amount to just slightly more than what had come during the period of direct royal rule, at a time when development assistance had been halted by many European donors.